BreakfastBurrito_007

How did Biden create this oil shortage then? and why would he do that? I also don't get how this is such a huge scandal.

"short life expectancies" surely you mean their time in usage, and not the time they spend in existance? Are you upset about the gas prices being super high, or the climate arrogance, or what?

Are you serious? even if they buy saudi oil, burning it still releases emissions in the usa. This notably does not increase emissions in saudi arabia. Either way, this does not reduce USA's carbon footprint. A better example of exporting emissions is buying beef from brazil, where the emissions happen in the country the product is bought from.

To be honest, the overemphasis on individual actions, such as people having fewer children or the president being less ostentatious is crazy. Oil producers in the us even support reducing carbon footprint, because they know it can improve their image and it won't lead to any decrease in sales. People can not change their carbon footprint very easily while the systems they live in are not designed to reduce it. With all this talk about individual responsibility, people forget the amount of power that governments/corporations have over our behavior as well as the changes that could be made to decrease waste and emissions. For example, there is the good idea to make companies responsible for the packaging that they sell with their product. At least in the USA, packaging is not made to be easily dismantled. If it were, it would be easy to sort one's recycling and improve efficiency there. I feel this should be a no-brainer and all it requires are some new, clever designs for packaging. Another idea would be to sponsor car trade ins, exchanging super old gas guzzlers for newer electric cars or efficient hybrids. I can totally understand people being financially trapped into continuing to use an old car, because they have exceeded the economic service life and now need to repair/ refuel very frequently.

I don't think you understand the time difference between cancelling future projects in the US, and OPEC oil selling (they don't ever slow drilling, they just slow selling) . When OPEC wants the price to be higher, they simply sell less oil. Energy infrastructure is expensive and it is not feasible to expand oil production capacity simply because of price hikes dictated by OPEC that can sometimes last only a month. The best way to fix the situation (which is not one of long term oil availability, but one of short term trade economics) would be to discuss this with OPEC and try to get a lower price, otherwise oil will still be very expensive. I am not saying this is going to be successful, just that it makes no sense to build more rigs/wells just for price fluctuations. Do you think OPEC countries care about pollution? Also please consider the fact that those hydrocarbons are burned in the USA despite being unearthed from OPEC, so that means all the pollution and carbon emissions happen in the USA and not in Saudi Arabia and such countries. This means that this is not a "scheme" to make the USA look like it has lower carbon emissions than it does.

There are some cases where they help, but I generally don't use them. An example is: your skirmishers are being rushed from the side by javelin cavalry, so your melee are no longer magnetically attracting all their fire. In this case you choose "box" to bring the melee to form a ring around your ranged units which temporarily makes them invincible (so long as the melee are alive).

From the graph, the reduction in production happened in 2020 and that was before Biden entered office, and I guess it was due to the pandemic's first outburst in the USA in March 2020.

Keep in mind that Biden was cancelling lease sales of public lands and stopping development of future oil and gas production. I don't think it resulted in the shutting off of any oil or gas production in the USA.

I agree, the armor is the problem. Swordcavalry should not be superior in every way except barely losing to spearcav. The best way to fix the discrepancy between spearcav and swordcav is to let swordcav keep the high damage, but reduce their armor. This way, spearcav will defeat swordcav more convincingly and spearcav will be more survivable, but not as lethal as swordcav.

Would it make sense from a gameplay or historical sense if these units could be trained faster than normal? Also, would they cost food/wood or would they be like mercs as @Dakara said I feel this could give rise to some interesting fights. I like this idea quite a bit.

Kushites have quite a few powerful things like good cavalry and cheap elephants, not to mention the possibility of training rank 3 healers. I think their main challenge is that CS archers are pretty bad this alpha. my favorite thing of theirs is the club men mercenary that I fail so much at using.

Usually instead of deleting units I just try to fight with about 100-120 of them, leaving enough eco-units to retrain into champions or cav when those units die. This way I fight well enough with CS army and I don't waste as much time trying to reach champion before my first big fight. Iber is fantastic at this because it is possible to be training indibil while your units are fighting right after finishing fort, and the first wave of champions can be made from leftover or bartered res as soon as indibil is trained. One thing that really can beat this is if someone knows what I am up to and goes all in (150 units +siege). Seleucids are great at the "15 min all in", but also have great champion options if the engagement reaches a stalemate. In a25 I have noticed a lot of accidental double clicks, when I mean to do a single. I thought it was just me and my crap keyboard.

I don't use healers in most games, but it seems that healing melee is the best. +x hp per second is more valuable for high armor units because each of their health points is harder to deplete. Healers are snipable because they are so weak, but then they also flee when attacked so it would be dangerous for someone to fail the healer snipe if there were athenian hoplites in front of it. Also, it does not make sense to heal ranged units because the fight is lost by whoever loses their melee units first. Winning with athens kind of a flex (at least in TG).

Yea @Lion.Kanzen Daut seems to be picking up on AoE4 very quickly. Did you see his video where he was delhi and rushed out 2 towered war elephants? AoE4 has a lot of geat game design, but I feel they went backward in more than a few ways.

How sexist XD. Cancel culture strikes yet again. I think my kush club fails are pretty high on the dumb burrito list.

I had no idea there were so many states in the USA.

No, that is a large overgeneralization from what I wrote. If an ally is cooperating and communicating, then I have a lot of fun working together to beat the other team.

Ah that does make sense, however, it is sometimes possible for an enemy to change formations and swivel the pikes to the best spot. If they are surrounded, the best one would be box because it puts the pikes all along the outside perimeter of the box.

@Dakara yes I think it is most noticeable with the merc cav from carth. An easy strategy with them is to attack the CS eco of a noob on enemy team for the purpose of ranking up the units before passing on to a better player who you can beat much more easily now that you are rank 3 while he is rank 1. Another frustrating situation is when an ally loses to an enemy army with a KD of .05 and now you must fight a full rank 3 army.

I heard that ranking up is much stronger for melee units than ranged units. In previous alphas this was not a problem because melee units were less important. I think being rank 3 would not be as much of a problem for snowballing if there were other ways to reach rank 2/3, such as making garrison-training faster, or allowing training of rank 2/3 units for a higher price. (if you go to the "all civs are my favorite" discussion, there is a lot of debate about this).

I like how the flat hills with the cc's on them are grouped and combined by team, so that there are many ways up, but that team members can easily move to each other's bases. Nice work!

This guy's youtube is great in my opinion, he has some very convincing graphics and explanations.

@Philip the Swaggerless I actually watched the game where you countered mass (40+) iber fire cav with your own CS Persian cavlalry. I am very impressed you managed this, and I have not seen someone else do it before or since. I think a key factor is that your enemy ignored warnings (previous engagements) to make more spearcav in his cavalry composition and eventually you trapped him and he lost all the champs. It is my observation that Iber is the "easiest" cavalry civilization because of a fast boom, -15% unit cost hero, and powerful and survivable champions. However, there are other civilizations like Persians and Gauls that have better heroes to accompany their cavalry (Kurush and Vercingetorix), so iber cav will be very dominant unless another player is able to make their own well-upgraded CS cavalry with maybe a few champions. Also, Persians have hyrcanian cavalry which could be able to raid iber farmers which are usually protected by wall. (hyrcanian cav can be doing 3+ crush per 1 second to buildings) so they can bust the wall pretty easily and idle the farmers, which can help stop firecav spam.

My only concern with the "attack-group" option is that it could make it too east to ignore pikemen in that group, I want to allow the other player to do some kind of micro to try to avoid it. For example, if you used attack group your enemy would continue to have his pikemen be ignored even after they are mixed back into the army, which would be quite frustrating. I think it is ok if attack-ground can result in the ranged units shooting at nothing, because in a big battle, when this feature would be most useful, the player is already watching, making sure they are not losing too many units/ responding to enemy battle tactics. @wowgetoffyourcellphone do you know how I could test that bit of code that already exists for attack-ground? I have no idea how. If @real_tabasco_sauce and I were able to each get it to work, we could test it in different larger scale scenarios to see if it is useful, behaves as expected, or helps unit balance. While AoE4 has almost no battle behavior optimization to be done by the player, 0ad could improve in that area.

I think since it has better armor and better attack it is quite op. It has substantially more armor than any other cavalry unit. Only the seleucid +2 armor (hero) boosted champion cavalry can equal them, and that is without a roman cav hero. I think it would be best to reduce champion swordcav armor to below that of champion spearcavalry, and leave their attack damage the way it is in a25 I am not sure about this one yet, right now I am more in support of reducing pierce armor and/or travel speed by a level to make them more vulnerable. I think a better way to reduce damage would be eliminating fire damage to units. It is true, players with pikemen do not always win, but they do have a huge advantage over those with spears. Most frustrating is that 10-15 pikemen can make 50+ ranged units invulnerable for as long as there are pikes. I think we need to break the "melee units die first" forced fighting trend by adding attack-ground or attack area, I think pikes would still be quite powerful after this is added, but players would have more ways of working around them, and also battles would be more interesting overall, with no one class of unit necessarily dying first. I am trying to test the attack-ground thing this weekend, but to be honest I have no idea how to do that.