real_tabasco_sauce

it wasn't play tested enough and there was lots of mixed opinions on it.

they seem good to me!

Renaming the civ is fine, just be sure to really hunt down every last “pers”. I see some discussion again of coalitions, or the idea of selecting specifications with each phase, but I maintain the position that these are awkward for gameplay. Myself and others have a lot of comments on this in the “coalitions” discussion @Genava55 linked.

As an alternative, perhaps we could add a capture defense boost (technically a capture attack addition or a multiplier) for specific buildings, like the CC and fort. Also, we could change the default hero contribution to capture point regeneration (currently +1, which is negligible).

I was referring to the fortress. I agree that more points would be good. On the last point, I don't recommend adding an additional point of complication to a mechanic that is already complicated, as you mention in your OP. I agree with the other stuff, especially the need to nerf the high volume capturing scenario and not the small volume. To clear up some confusion about the nerfs that I introduced ahead of R28: by increasing the default regen rate, we essentially increase the number of units needed to achieve the "high volume" capturing scenario. At the same time, you are punished less for having an empty CC, giving you time to garrison it. I don't say that its perfect, but its better now, and in my games I see people go for siege more often.

This was already the case, adding regen rate just shifts the curve rightward. Also, I don't get how adding 1000 points would help that much in the cases you bring up. 5 seconds to maybe 5.5 or 6 seconds?

totally, there needs to be some pushing. Or just remove the option that stops formations from being disbanded as it is pretty much only useful for the exploit.

i thought there was an issue already but I am not finding it.

That is probably beyond my time/abilities but I know it has been discussed. I think it would be a great opportunity to enrich gameplay (multi-projectile siege, unique units, ships perhaps).

currently food resources all have the same carry capacity.

@wraitii had some ideas on this as well. I do think just not stopping the units as in the second video is a decent short term solution. Typically, you are not often telling your whole army to do a 180° turn compared to turns of 90° or less. And even in the case of the 180 degree turn, the effect is not really worse than before. It could go in com mod when i have time to put one together.

We currently calculate paths immediately for only 40 units, while the remainder figure out their path in time for the next turn. What this means unfortunately is that the remaining units have to stop for a whole turn and then accelerate from 0 m/s. Screen Recording 2026-03-28 195209.mp4 Instead, we can let units continue on their previous path so that they don't stop and have to re-accelerate. The downside here is that units will continue in the wrong direction a little if you tell them to make a 180 degree turn. Screen Recording 2026-03-28 194829.mp4 There are probably better long-term solutions, like giving large selections a really quick and dirty "guess" path before calculating the new paths. seem like an upgrade?

building phases already are a technology. So what you can do is add a technology field to the requirements list: "requirements": { "all": [ { "tech": "my_technology" }, {"entity": { "class": "Town", "number": 3 }} ] },

storehouse and farmstead technologies apply only to civilians. thoughts?

yeah there were some issues with that for sure. Basically the distance values between compilers seem very slightly different in some cases and that difference compounds quickly to cause problems. It might yet be doable.