PyrrhicVictoryGuy

Very nice , good job and keep developing delenda est

thanks for clarifying man , the first one on the left looks sick

Quick update , phillip indeed has the armor , i tested this just now but i swear i did a game where he had that brown armor that is on his portrait , maybe he also has cuirass permutations?

In game his model has a cheap looking cuirass, seriously it looks like something a larper would use. I would give his model the cuirass that was found in his tomb.

Like seriously Phillip makes xbow and companions godly. For cavalry i find that you have to kinda trick your opponent to bait them into coming a bit ou of position since that is what melee cav punishes more . I am yet to try spear cav plus cav skirms or regular skirms though . The only gripe i have with phillip is that in game he doesn't have the vergina cuirass. Demetrios is a very safe and solid choice obviously but I'll always remember him as the poor sod who couldn't take Rhodes.

In one word... Phillipos

Every soldier spawns in aggressive stance hence why they stop collecting , i sugest putting them in defensive or even passive .

Ah ok CS was citizen soldiers desculpa

what do you mean?

Well here is a proposal , don´t know if anyone has already said but i just came up with it . What ifcitizen soldier could be restricted to building like 2/3 of the buildings available and women could only build farms , corrals , farmsteads , houses , etc ... ( carthage soldiers could build the apartements in phase 1) , i mean people don´t even use soldiers for farming , so "mirroring " real life , these soldiers would be builders , architects , philosophers , carpenters, etc... first and conscripts later so would make sense that they would know how to build barracks / fortresses , armories and what not . Then women would be primarly resource gathereers and soldiers could no longer collect these , so unless the player wanted to go on a massive building spree wich would be unlikely due the smaller amount of resources collected due to women being bad at getting anything but food, this would in turn open the way for another class of gathereers wich i have already seen in some topics , the slave would be better at getting stone and metal . All this would make rushes more viable since the victim of the rush, lets a say a booming player would have a lot less troops since booming would not equal turtling in this proposed scenario.

Well that is a shame , at the moment when you make a syntagma , the phalangites just spread out like normal and i was expecting a bit more going forward but oh well.

For all that it's worth , the 2 column formation really helps with pathfinding and micro of melee cav

As i was playing I started to wonder what the formations do at the moment, especially the more specific ones like the syntagma , phalanx and wedge ? They aren´t fully impelemented as the starting screen in the menu states ( looking at you phalanx) and so i would like to ask what is planned for these 3 formations i mentioned in the next iteration of the game , not only from a unit stat change but their behavior in combat as well . Of course i would also ask what would you guys think about the ups and downs of their implementation in regards to the current meta.

The camp swords really make the diference although you can g with a 5/1 or maybe 5/2 , pikemen swordsman ratio , get no more than 5 elephants ( 10 or more if go with seleukus) , then sink your resources in the champ cav paired with stable upgrades and antiochus , this army comp will make godly at micro when you eventually start winning ehehheh.

i mean nerfing ranged cav is good but these changes also hurt spear and sword cav, especially since spear cav already struggles agains't ranged units due to their low pierce armor

i downloaded it this afternoon and playd a couple of matches with it, i really liked the upgraded mercs from the get go , makes them distinct and usefull , exactly what should set them apart from citizens . Cavalry having a buff to their health is nice although i would see certain spear cav having their damage increased such as the companions for makedon but maybe it would make more sense to buff the spear cav of civs that don't have any other melee cav as the sucessor states to make their cav a bit more all rounder . As for the counters , well age of myhtolofy seemed to it pretty wel especially with the greek ones wich i have put the link bellow : http://aom.heavengames.com/cgi-bin/forums/display.cgi?action=ct&f=11,16332,0,all

I'd wager that a dozen or so would the job

Rnaged infantry is that bit bloated , recently i've been trying out army compositions without any ranged units but i tell you it's really hard to win but satisfying although only the civs with a lot of options like seleucids can do it. i just love the look of the catphracts and the thessalian cav

Shouldn't one use the swordsman champ coupled with antiochus III as seleucids to counter infantry ?

i thought the formations had no effect on unit's stats yet , if they do how can i see the change in-game?

Messing with the elephants would do one of the following , increase the disparity between very good civs like seleucids who have almost all of the troop types and civs who are already starved for options in battle like the greeks, if u nerf their health then its a very heavy nerf and u risk people not even using them wich would partly undermine the identity of the factions that can field them, witch will result in the game having a little less varity overall.

As of now , i am a new player to the game but one would think mercenaries would have better stats than citizen soldiers, as one is a professional and the other a conscript . My experience with this was with the seleucids were i trained the mercenary spear cav, " the something something hetairos" and its stats seemed to equal of the citizen spear cav of makedonia , the " sarissaphoros" . Now this isn't really a very important thing since i think the idea with mercs is to give certain civs more options at an increased resource cost. With that said some mercs available seem redundant , carthage can build the italian and iberian embassies and has little need for celtic one , again the spear cav and sword inf for seleucids makes sense since their own spear cav and sword inf are champs. I haven't touched the other successor kingdom but perhaps the ptolomies should also have to rely on greek mercs because native troops were of lesser quality , but i think making mercs better would skrew the balance. I also take the liberty to ask why does spear cav have 2 dmg types ? Doesn't having 2 dmg types mean their dmg has to go through 2 types of defense which will lower the real dmg ( after subtracting the defense percentage of the target) when compared to sword cav who has only one type of dmg?

Ok good to know thanks i was expecting something like : sword cav > spear cav > range (skirm ) > range > sword > spear > all cav Also i get a bit stressed when i see i have phalangites and hoplites / spearmen , are the hoplites better armoured and the pikemen better armed?

Hi , coming from total and age of mythology and i dont understand some relations in the game for example the hetairoi beat peltastes but can't do the same with toxotes . Also when playing the seleucids i found that mercenary companions are stat-wise inferior to the macedonian one.