Jump to content

av93

Community Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    975

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

 Content Type 

Posts posted by av93

  2. Relics proposals

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by av93

    I think it could be implemented in a little hacky way.

    Give to relic a "wonder" attribute, movement, and make them able to be captured and to be indestructible. Plus wonder victory enabled. For a 1 relic wonder victory.

    Alternative: make a building buildable only with a X numbers of relics, and instead of giving the wonder victory to the relics, give that to the building.

    • Like 1

  4. Taxes

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    Houses generating a resource trickle could be an unique bonus to a particular civ (like aoe3 Japanese houses), but I prefer that over a general trait for all civs. I very agree Justus position on units costing more than 2 resources.

  14. make bolt-shooters great (and usefull!) again

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    7 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
      Hide contents

    * If I was to have carte blanche to redesign the sieging mechanix, I would remove health for buildings entirely and give them siege points, so say a Fortress has 20 siege points and a Barracks has 10 siege points, it take 20 hits with a catapult or battery ram to destroy the Fortress. I know this is simplistic, but I like the simplicity with something like this. Maybe a bolt shooter has 1 siege attack, a catapult has 2 siege attack, and a ram has 3 siege attack. I would say human unit like a Hoplite would only have 1 siege point (getting struck by a catapult rock or siege bolt should be a 1-hit kill, lets be honest). Elephants get 5 or something.

     


    Can't you make a similar concept playing with hp, armours, bonus and penalties?

     


     

  20. Phase restrictions?

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    Day of suggestions, today?

    Here, mine, is the aim that in all game all strategies should be viable (rush, turtle, boom).

    In phase/tier 1, I thought about a RPS system:
    -Spearman could be the only unit available until phase 1.5, that in numbers are enough tankier to take CC and towers.
    -Cavalry skirmishers are good against them, but lose to structures.

    So spear infantry>towers/cc>skirmisher cav>spear infantry.

    Blacksmith allows tier 1.5 could be a strategic decision buildable in phase 1: to build them or make another barrack.
    -Unlocks infantry skirmishers, with good dps against infantry in general and against ranged cav. Shorter range than towers so they are good for raiding and defend, but not against defensive buildings.
    -Unlocks also cavalry swordsman, good against ranged infantry, slightly better than spear infantry against buildings. Could be soft-countered with skirmisher cavalry with hit&tactics.
    -Allows military techs in phase II

    *Swordman, slingers, and the other cav available in phase II or in tier 1.5?

    Romans and Iberians could be subvert this: Romans could train swordsman (Good against infantry and also better against buildings. Countered by well guarded or hit&run ranged infantry, and ranged infantry.) and Iberians skirmishers instead of spearman in phase I.

    You then you can try to rush with spears/cav skirmishers, turtle up with towers. At mid phase I you get 2 units that counter each other, being skirmisher a good defense unit but also support unit to rush. Or you can skip and go to phase II for better eco tech and better soldiers.

    The problem by design is that booming allows a good mass of soldiers that can defence. Making skirmishers less common in phase I would solve this without dropping c/s concept. Also barracks soldiers could start in advanced rank so choices between training them in CC or barracks have actual consequences. And also targeting them when raiding. CC could train only women and spear infantry and one limited explorer unit (cav skirmisher skin without javelins). Spearman trained there could go with milita status (can't rank and military upgrades doesn't affect them)

    Let's hope that some ideas help someone (either the base game or some mod)

    • Like 2

  21. Carthage's triple walls

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    2 minutes ago, LordGood said:

    Here's a crazy idea, what if the walls had auras that would boost each other's hitpoints? That would encourage building them together for a stronger defense/stone ratio

    Then walls mazes maybe would be OP. Stacking auras could be limited? That would be a nice addition if not @fatherbushido for next alpha.

    I'm for a upgrade and also for a new model with reduced footprint, for a better placement. Also, I would prefer a reduced hitpoint bonus, instead of a triple HP but more expensive walls (if you can't build them, isn't a bonus)

     

    On 4/10/2016 at 9:37 PM, LordGood said:

    It would be cool to have a "last stand" tech which either lets women contribute to building attack and cp regen, or gives houses a small, slow attack. It would encourage the destroying of buildings block by block, which would hold some truth to the actual siege of Carthage. Maybe with such a strong defensive bonus have a unit train time penalty to shift the balance away from offense


    This could work for Sparta and Celt women. Altough Sparta women can attack, it would be a nice complement for them cause they don't have walls.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...