alre

I'm not sure I understand. what you are asking is the game to behave differently if you use the keyboard shortcut respect to when you use the related command on the GUI?

well they did have some form of walling around all their settlements. it's just that fields weren't usually included.

the problem with SlopeConstraint is that it seems to work when TILE_CENTERED_HEIGTH_MAP = true, but it doesn't quite reflect passability (for units to walk on them) if TILE_CENTERED_HEIGTH_MAP = false. this is more like a mishap than a deal breaker, but it's a pity that PassableMapAreaConstraint doesn't work. besides, I'd like to ruefully notice that none of this is documented anywhere, so I still have a very rough understanding of how the heightmap is rendered, or what's the role of tiles in the pathfinder in general, like what's the true maximum passable slope, and how is it computed.

PassableMapAreaConstraint doesn't work at all for me. I mean, it selects all tiles as they all were passable.

the ancients built their cities in no way similar to how it's done in the game. they would have fields before the agorà, for instance. it's not about how the ancients would actually build cities.

between javascript and lua, I'd have gone with lua all the time, but that is my personal preference. anyway, I wonder if there is some way to test javascript files in some way different from running the game. I'm working on my random map project and I don't know any other way than editing the files with notepad++ and then directly try the game. since there is some relatively complex algorithm involved, that's quite suboptimal, there is some way I can set an IDE to run my code and see how it works?

in general i'd like to have all my military units in defensive stance by default. at least when playing archer civs I would put them in defensive stance in many games.

if you want to be able to decide the exact spot where to start the game from, have a nomad game (it's nomad until you place your first cc).

I like it. Isn't it strange that they decided to "come back" somehow, from the more realistic trade routes of AoE 3? I liked that concept better.

point is that archer walk speed is not there anymore.

maurya had a very good economy in A24. now that's gone.

Fair enough, I guess I couldn't remember the true infantry speed. We will eventually see if archers are still OP or severely UP as I think instead. However, I think camels are still impossible to deal with by units with lesser range, which was the point in question. They can escape anywhere without problems in A25.

lol. how comes than than camels are broken again, and archers are in a worse position than in A23? I feared that. However, is a tweak of two parameters really something that needs a further RC? well I guess we will catch up in no-skirms TGs.

changing preferred targets of archers from any organic unit to skirmishers seems like a nice off-the-charts idea to buff archers. I like it, but I don't know how effective that would be, we should make a mod and test it. That would be a very simple mod, but still, I don't think this is the right time to try new ideas. how good was the "OP pop bonus" of persia and maurya in A23? Noone ever played persia, and maurya too were regarded as underdogs. People would complain that archers in general were too weak, and now they are going to be even weaker than then. skirmisher civs are OP in this release candidate, I would bet on it.

60 massed archers vs 60 skirms properly managed to stay massed as well (avoid slow unwinding), ends with a crushing win by the skirms (26 left).

I tried again, this time with 60 extremely massed archers against 60 javeliners. javs won again by a small margin (6 left). For the game to be balanced they should have lost bad.

Yes, at least archer civs retain their pop cap bonus. But they lose to massed skirms despite their superior range, because lower speed compensates for that.

I only realised yesterday that in A25 different speeds between ranged infantry units were reintroduced. Today I did a combat test on Atlas with 30 archers vs 30 skirmishers. And the skirmishers won. This means that not only skirms will be stronger than archers against melee (as they already were), but they will even be stronger than archers in a direct fight, AND in economy! In other words, archers will be worthless. In fact, there will be 3 factors (that I know of) playing against archers in A25, compared to A23 where they were already used very little: nerfed fortifications, larger arrow spread and more agile cavalry. I thought that the only direct nerf to archers was the larger spread (and, less directly, the changed archer tradition), and I thought it was a very wise decision: balancing trough little steps. Instead they got crippled like never before. This is terrible. Please make ranged infantry speeds equal again.

I destroyed my own cc in a 1v1 earlier today.

there was a bug in A24 that made ships not throw arrows for garrisoned troups sometimes. Do you know about it? Has it been fixed? replays are couples of files that you can find in your personal folder for the game files, they keep the log of what happens in the game so that you can see the replay in the game.

yes, and the shorter turns.

I think that an option for making charging a balanced mechanic would be having people move with randomly different speeds (by a limited degree, not too variable). I've been pushing this idea for some time. This would allow some kills when melee pursues fleeing units, but not all of them. Btw I still think the game would be better without running.

Cavalry is much more nimble than before, thanks to the new pathfinder. It stacks in worm-like fast moving columns and reacts faster to orders, also camel archers can more easily evade spear cav, ignoring any chokepoint. They are still quite effective. Will meta still shift towards melee? Something to try next time: archer rushes.

If you want to see it, you have to download release candidate 3 of A25 (already outdated). so you see how "charging" was.

lol. no. charging was the fancy name of a bug. It was introduced in the development version of the game a couple of months ago, and it came out some weeks ago. It just got fixed. The replay attached cannot be played with a release version of the game.