wowgetoffyourcellphone

This here sounds дивним. Really cool idea. +1

You will have maps that serve the game mechanics. IMHO, giving map makers 100% freedom and creativity should not be a priority. There are obviously 100 other different features and mechanics in the game that the map makers need to take into account. Iberian walls are no different in this regard. And as I said, the maps are crammed and weird for all players, not just Iberians, so the maps just need better design overall. All just my opinion. Why are metal and stone mines right next to the civ center on almost every map? Shouldn't the player need to scout for these precious deposits of minerals? That's what I'm saying -- rethink all the maps to take into account the game's features and mechanics. So far it doesn't look like this has been done. Not for the Iberians. Not for much else.

I think maps should be designed with all features in mind. And I also think the maps are too cramped with or without the Iberian walls. The random maps need redesigned/rethought. It would be better to have 10 or 12 really well-designed random maps than 30 random maps that are all cramped and weird and don't take into account game mechanics and features.

I don't make such an assumption at all. I was simply asking a question. My question is in regards to the idea that the game is too slow. Only one guy seems to admit that he has have even tried it at 1.25x (iNcog). I have to say the responses I have gotten so far in this thread have been troubling. I am a long time lurker. I was around the forums 2+ years ago under a different name ( been playing the game since alpha 1, or was it alpha 2, don't remember) and I remember this to be a much friendlier (and more productive!) place then. You have this "balance branch" run by a team member (?) with contributors challenging me to a schoolyard duel like we're in middle school instead of discussing a video game? As someone in the game industry, I seriously wonder about the methods being applied here. Is there a vision? What are the guiding principles for this branch? Will any of your changes actually make sense within the context of the game design? Have simpler solutions to balancing problems even been attempted before throwing out what seems to be a mature set of game rules?

*sigh*

Yes. You fail to answer my question.

Then I think the actual temple could be scaled up a bit to match the majesty of the other temples.

No, they "pop" into existence now as if they aren't even rendered.

Have you guys even attempted playing the game at 1.25x instead of making everything move faster as default?

Yep, this looks like exactly what happens. Thanks for looking into it. Solution before Alpha 17?

It's not going to have trees around it normally will it?

Edit: ticket #2643 I noticed that sometime near Alpha 16 clouds stopped getting rendered, and some other particles. But you can see them briefly when you zoom out a bit in the map editor. Anybody else run into this?

I think it's a mistake to make spearmen use pierce damage. Now you have to do weird (unnecessary) armor balancing for cavalry.

Thank you. I didnt know what was needed. system_info.txt

I can see ranged cavalry being the major harassers, with melee cav being used for hard hitting cavalry charges into the flank (see the Total War series for example). About the swordsmen wood cost, I just find it odd to make units cost more than 2 different resources, especially a default unit that you train at the beginning of a game. Pushing would be awesomeness for large units.

The water in my game now goes black, when just a couple days ago it was fine.

Yeah, but that's how cavalry was used in real life. Yeah, but who trains 25 healers? Do you want players to train 25 healers? Maybe 100 Food and 100 Metal? Could just go 50F 60M and then use blacksmith techs to reduce their cost in late game. Speaking of techs, I miss the wheelbarrow. Sounds more like a pathfinding problem? Of course. I don't understand why the other guy got mad. Have you tried playing the game at 1.25 or 1.5 speed? In my opinion, using the game speeds is much better than changing a bunch of other stuff to get the same effect.

Then nerf the skirmcav. Has that been tried?

Long time lurker. First post. First thoughts. What is the justification for making cavalry weaker against ranged attacks? Aren't cavalry (generally) supposed to counter ranged units? Priests made to cost only food and not metal, for what reason? Are we supposed to be able to mass Priests? Shouldn't Priests be special support units, hence cost some Metal? Also, why do swordsmen cost wood? Makes no sense to me. And rams "attacking" soldiers and women sounds pretty weird. Seems like a lot of the changes were made to just make changes? Experiment? Look forward to some matches though.