borg-

At this point I do not venture to say which ones are better or worse. So far I have been able to make good games with all of them.

The biggest proof that a24 is better than a23, is to join a team game and see at least 6 different civilizations, where before we only had two haha

Slinger has the advantage of having crush damage that can be good against buildings and siege units. I am also in favor of being a low cost troop, but you only analyzed the combat part, but what would be the economic impact of a unit costing 20% less at the beginning of the game?

Perhaps an adjustment in the cost of metal or some other attribute may be enough instead of being able to collect resources?

Well kushite camps can be built in neutral territory, so I'm fine with them right now. If I am not mistaken for Carthage there is a larger embassy, not currently used in the game. We can replace the 3 embassies with the bigger one, which could train all units, and maybe increase the construction limit.

Maybe civilizations with great mercenary potential like carthage, can train level 2 mercenaries instead of 1 like other civilizations, it's just an idea.

Mercenaries cannot collect resources as a way of diversifying gameplay and also more realistic historically, and particularly I don't intend to change that. On the main point of the discussion, it is interesting, but if we remove the mercenary camps/embassy then the game becomes more equal for all civilizations, so any suggestions?

Is it scheduled for a25?

@Alexandermb can we have this for a25?

Yes, now after tests we can avail better. Contrary to what @vinmesay, economics should be taken into consideration, because if you delay the rush just for a moment, it may be pie to attack your opponent, then he wins in the economy. As I said earlier, dogs are exclusively for attacking, so with an opponent's carelessness, they must be able to do serious damage and even win the game. It seems to me that a small adjustment is necessary, but nothing to move to p2 or something like that.

Exactly what I said. There is still a lot to be tested and new strategies to be used. We have very little information yet. The fact that you lose one game against dogs vs player much better than you, does not mean that everything is wrong and that everything must change or dogs go back to p2. But as I said before, it is great to point out problems and this is really necessary, but also present a proposal to solve problem.

Dogs cannot do anything, only open a map and attack, so they must be able to fight with some efficiency, the question is what would be the ideal proposal for this. The current proposal for Celts is that they have a very strong initial phase1, with efficient rush and lose their efficiency in later phases. so I believe that a very small adjustment must be made, nothing that remove the efficiency of the dogs. The ideal of @Genava55 should be enough.

Tnx for feedback.

Ok, tnx @Genava55

So with same resources you fight 20 dogs with this mix of units, and you can still collect resources. Probably dogs will lost vs archers, slinger, swordsman and javelins, only against spearmen and maybe pike they can win. If you are willing to open a discussion, be willing to test and put some proposals to solve the problem that, not just throw a bunch of numbers.

Map editor and make some tests 20 dogs x 20 units (infantry, same cost per unit). Send me results pls. I cant make tests now.

you forgot the attack, javelins for example have Double attack than dogs and have distance in your favor. basically the dog is the same as a23, just with a little more health, but with less speed and can’t promote, so why wasn’t it used in a23 and now it’s op? the only justification would be the fact that I can be trained in p1, but I think that this can be learned to be defended. too early to say it's op and needs to be a civilization banned from games. i played brit vs fpre yesterday, and tried dog rush. I was not efficient when I only had dogs, he already had a significant number of soldiers and I couldn't do anything, I had to train cavalry to attack with my dogs, so I managed to be effective, but it cost me a lot of eco and certainly if I was against vali or feld i would have lost the game.

what I meant is that for you to have large quantities of food to the point of spamming dogs is difficult. With the value of a dog you can train 2 women. If you don't have women, you won't have a significant amount of food, unless you have a lot of game. You also need wood to make farms for food. What I mean is that it is not easy for you to have enough food at the beginning of the game to destroy your enemy with just dogs, because if you do that it is a huge risk to your economy.

The cost of a dog and a soldier is the same in total resources. One can only attack, the other can attack and collect res and building, how can this make dogs a mega op? For you to have a dog you need a lot of food, so theoretically less soldiers and women in the wood, less wood, less farms, less food. I don't really understand your point here.

Every dog trained is a unit unless you could be using it to collect resources, if you are not effective in the rush you lose the game. In late game they can be a great help for the troops, but that was already in a23, so nothing has changed.

Well, to say that it is a mistake p1 dogs because a much better player than you killed many units of yours, is not a valid point. If you lost 100 units to 20 dogs, the problem is with your skills I think, no offense. Dogs are extremely vulnerable, you can make towers, palisades etc.

Exactly. Dogs not very effective vs melee + ranged units. They are used to "make 100 slings and crush all".

Edit.

Understand that balancing is not as simple as it looks. Having hp bonuses again after passing the phase increases the amount of health of the units in late game, making champions op. If the problem is defense construction, then we will change defense construction. Bonus ptol is better now, you want free cuz more difference? Outpost i agree.

It is a valid strategy, mainly because we want Celts to be rush civilizations. Dogs can kill women easy yes, but they can hardly do that inside the CC, because they have a very low vision range. The current state is better than the dog in a23 which alone can kill 10 women. To train a first dog you need to invest 350 in resources, while your enemy can train like 4 soldiers with the same resource, a matter of choice. If you play against brit be aware that it is a viable strategy, and training soldiers or making towers can be interesting to avoid this rush.