Marbod

Sounds very plausible for me. Because this happens to me only on that map. Its a U-shaped landmass with water anywhere else. The way to make it from one side to the other is really a long U-Turn lol. But the good thing is, i can alter the maps to get rid of some problems easy enough. Or just play another map, there are plenty of them fun to play. Thy for help

Well it turned to be the better choice for me too by now after reading the posts again. I missed somehow the second table which corrected the math that assumed that batches are only good at high numbers 27+.

Somehow i did not read this part of the postings. That means i was sure that 1by1 is good for eco but batches only for military training if not only at high 25+ numbers like the first post. Now i see why this is wrong. Although i only play vs AI and i have no a player vs player expertise, i am happy because to handle batches (i do mostly steps by 5 now, 5 early, and 10 or 15 later if bank is huge and i am at the end game) is also much more convinient to control. Thank you for doing the math. Time for batching

I understand that point of view in which champs are thought of being at the absolute maximum of potential. Which i think (which doesnt matter) is not a good idea. What would be so off if they would also be able to get stronger? Is it just a balancing problem? Because i didnt want to give the impression that they should not be the supposedly most experienced troops one have. That aspect wouldnt be touched at all if one just adds experience levels. Also the distinction isnt touched. Thats why i am curios about your statement. So i get the impression that the champs are to be thought at a maximum cap already. Ok. Thanks for clarification.

Right. That would be nice. Sorry, i dont know the term Regicide games.

Even though i like this very much, the most obvious simple thing to diversify would be the ability of champions to gain experience. I attack you with new "trained" (called, bought) champions but you have still some who already seen 3 battles. There you go.

Sorry if i didnt correctly explain. I was not thinking about the 1 hero only cap. I absolutely agree there. I was thinking about when the third one is defeated, the AI fighting potential falls significantly because, well they cannot train more. Even though that is a logically good thing for the game not to resurrect already dead named heroes, it would be much more challenging if at least the AI would be excluded from logic there, just for the sake of simple enhancement of difficulty besides more production %.

I think it would be only a good idea to introduce Champion experience. Think of it. You dont wanna lose them then not only because they are expensive, because at a certain point, this is not the case anymore. And healers would be more viable. Even Champions should be able to become stronger after battle.

There is a map called mediterranean_grove_2p which i really like to play against the AI, but more often than not, the AI bunches alot of units and the heroe at the edge of a cliff at the south even if there is a land way just to the north. At that point it becomes boring and non-challenging, better say not functional to play. This is not always the case. But happend about 4 or 5 times now in about 10 games. Is this something about pathfinding and or terrain?

Training and usage of Healers by the AI (AI wont train them, but even doesnt use them if i placed them from start) Training and putting citizen milita who are going war into barracks long before attacking the player to have more xp and therefore strength (i think this one is not realistic to be introduced) An option to get unlimited/uncapped Heroes for the AI (just not only 3)

Since unit batch training was introduced i followed one simple rule. 1. Single training for eco 2. Batch training for military usage (champs, healers and citizens whose only purpose was to train up exp for war) Done.

Well, that would be too much. But i only meant the restriction to build them only 3 times. Because in longer games, if i killed the 3rd one, the potential of the AI army is significantly lower, even though its eventually just a very strong unit less on the battlefield. But i think it would be not too hard to have always 1 enemy heroe in field. For the player it is really nice not to be able to build them all over again.

Hello all. I am very excited about the ongoing development. I play this game since A23 but only vs AI (very hard). I am a modder myself (just for myself though). I did mod games like Baldur's Gate 2, Medieval Total War, Skyrim and Stalker series. Here are some points i would like to discuss. Most are AI related. 1. Why doesn't the AI use healers? Wouldn't it be easy to implement the usage of healer units by the AI? Eventually the AI would be stronger then? 2. Why doesn't the AI use barracks to gain xp for some of their troops? I could imagine that this would not be to easy to implement? I did a workaround as i was playing agains roman bots, i added some roman field camps to their starting area in my modded map, so they keep building at least some units with xp level 2. I didnt even know that roman field camp units start at xp lvl 2. 3. Why is there no option, like for barracks, to train healers in temples? I must admit, i for the most time didnt know that my people could get xp from barracks. I always trained them in field battles lol. But as i discovered that some months ago, i thought that it would be not a bad idea to give healers the same opportunity to do the same it temples. 4. It could be more challenging if the very hard AI would not be restricted to build leaders/heroes only once. Thanks for reading and thank you all for participating and developing this gem of a game.