chrstgtr

I think it still needs to be ported over and incorporated. My understanding is that the mod won't be a27 because other technical stuff needs to happen, but we could use the mod as a testing ground for things that may or may not be incorporated into a27.

I can’t speak for everyone, but I would like to see basically all of the community mod changes accepted into the regular game for a27. Only one I am iffy on is the ptol building cost/build time change. Maybe more testing is needed.

Well today I learned. Anyways, I think all melee champ cav is OP because most civs can’t counter them. but my general point is a grand solution patch that makes everyone happy probably doesn’t exist but a more narrow patch probably does (ie how only fire cav were changed last alpha)

Gauls also have it. I said it as an example of how the problem should be addressed (i.e., each unit type should be addressed one by one). I didn't say whether it should or should not change. (I do, however, think melee champ cav all need to change because the only units that can counter them are champ spear, which are way less mobile and therefore can't actually counter them, and other melee champ cav, which most civs don't have). Also, Romans are great and are a very diverse civ. Yeah, champ sword cav are their best unit, but I would argue that is a top 3 unit in the game and one that is OP.

This sounds new and fun

Not a fan. Cav is the problem. I wouldn't change inf stats because that impacts other stuff. Spears are meant to be worse than swords. Maybe. Would have to be tested. I would support. Awesome. Thanks.

The problem is cav. I wouldn't mess with inf stats because that will have other knock on effects. Maybe. Would have to test. I would be in favor of it. Sidenote: this would also really help inf vs. archer cav. I am not sure that is a "fix" that needs to happen (as opposed to just have cav be the counter to archer cav), but it is a fix I would like. Very helpful. Thank you. I just don't like the current set up because it makes it difficult to snipe and easy to lose your hero. But this fixes that.

They are differentiated--they are more expensive, have different armor, attack, health, and speed stats. I honestly, am not a fan of the proposal in its current form. I don't have a problem with cav except that they don't die when they clearly should (i.e., walking straight through a ball of inf with minimal losses) and spear inf don't counter them (i.e., skirm cav can easily out micro inf spear because of speed AND champ, merc, and promoted CS melee cav can easily beat spear inf in a head on fight). I have no problem with skirm cav dmg. EDIT: there are lots of differing opinions, here, which is why I think revisions to cav should be taken on as individual units (i.e., work on champ sword cav first) instead of an overall change to all cav. Very helpful. Thank you.

Totally off topic, but I really dislike how you can't individual control units (or unit types) in formations in a26.

I don't know if I have a problem with any of that outside of when cav fight spear head on and the cav wins. That's why I said a health nerf for champ melee cav, which decimate CS spear head on. Wrong discussion.

Sounds like it has potential. Do we have the coding capabilities to do this, though? I think this is a design question. I don't have a problem with cav dealing with dmg. If what you want is inf to be faster relative to cav then a cav speed nerf does the same thing without the other knock on effects for inf. Both of these would have huge other effects. Namely, a melee buff would impact inf balance and a cav armour nerf would impact cav battles.

@real_tabasco_sauce Making inf faster doesn’t mean they can attack more times. It just means they can close the gap quicker (if the cav decide to stop at all). @wowgetoffyourcellphoneis also right. A inf speed buff could have a huge impact on eco.

I don’t have any problem with skirm cav other than I don’t think that a small group of skirm should not beat a small group of spear (ie, 5 spear vs. 5 skirm cav with micro shouldn't result in 5 skirm cav surviving) (ie, there should be a speed nerf). Others have said they don’t see a problem with skirm cav too.

Honestly, it sounds like no consensus exists and the solution depends on who you walk to if you want a change (I, personally, do) then I would address each type of cav one by one. Talking about “cav” overall seems too divisive

Glad you're beginning to play with more diverse play styles. But what you describe mostly has to do with your skill level and that won't be changed by any of these changes. I suggest you watch some games with high level players to get better and see how units can be used. This is skill level. This is untrue, if used correctly.

Don't like damage nerf. Don't like inf speed buff (maybe it's needed for other reasons, but its application doesn't make sense here). Would do cav speed bonus instead. One of the most frustrating things with cav is when you "trap" them in a ball of infantry, but the cav still escape with minimal losses. This happens because cav have enough health to survive dealt damage and are fast enough to limit the number of landed hits. Slowing cav down means more hits can be landed on cav. Lower cav's health means those hits do more relative dmg. To start, I would slightly lower cav speed and lower champ melee health (melee champ cav shouldn't be able to fight with impunity against CS spears--otherwise there is no counter for them). I wouldn't change anything else unless cav continue to be a problem.

Yeah, that’s the effect of large maps generating with big forests.

+1 it’s not a huge change, but it makes it a bit more dynamic Forests are larger on bigger maps, which limits the impact in TGs All in all, I think it’s a slight positive. At worst, I don’t think it’s a bad

Agree. It won’t fix it entirely, but it def helps

As a general rule, I don't think things should change unless there is an improvement. It would only introduce a new variable that could (or could not) have harmful effects for any of the reasons explained above.

Fine. Like I said above, I don't care either way.

Personally, I like having the option to train animals that produce quicker and cost less, especially in p1. So, I wouldn’t delete all the animal types. Agree on reducing train time. But this will be tricky. I don’t care one way or other on getting rid of phase requirements for animal types. Players usually can’t afford cows in early game. I think we should also experiment with a bigger buff: decreasing the cost of animals and/or increasing the amount of food that each animal let’s you collect. Tying up a bunch of your food in corrals really slows you down in early/mid game.

Looks pretty to me. For me, the biggest problem with ships has to do with their fighting mechanics and pathfinding. I have zero suggestions for improvement.

I’m just trying to say you both have reasonable positions. Might as well test and see at this point. I doubt I would care either way

I think you and @real_tabasco_sauce are ignoring good arguments each of you put up. Healers are extremely strong when used correctly and leveled up. Metal can be gathered far quicker than food--the only concern is whether you run out. Metal is available on maps, but can easily be exhausted if you go for a merc or champ army. I would be fine with either cost structure.