Fabius

I see, why not make it like the Athenian metal mining bonus they get per age then, that would be a simpler and cleaner setup I think, the current system works, just looks odd having the same thing copy pasted thrice

I did check the gather rates, for a while I thought Carthage had some how gotten an extra 75% stone mining rate lol, then realised that was not the case. Makes sense to leave out the buttons

Carthage has the stone mining bonus of 25% listed 3 times, but also has a bonus saying that stone mining upgrades are free despite not having any stone mining upgrades apparently

Great thanks to the devs for their hard work, looking forward to playing the new version It seems the Spartan Ritualistic exercise bonus is dysfunctional, though I question why they needed such a strong bonus for an already strong infantry civ. As mentioned earlier the Roman Fertility bonus is also dysfunctional sadly Ptolomies do not have the ability to train civilians at their colony despite it saying in the building description that they should.

cool, glad to finally have the next version to play Alas there is already a problem to report, The Roman Fertility bonus is no longer functional, they still have to research fertility festival now to get civilians from houses. Is that due to the change in keywording or was the civ bonus just outright removed?

So if you destroy it does it turn back into a completed army camp again?

No as the reference is to the Corvus that Rome utilised against the Carthaginians, most boarding would just be people jumping onto the other ship, The Romans decided to drop a whole bridge on them and board that way instead. But the corvus did pose a risk to the ships safety due to it unbalancing the vessel, so I would expect the boarding ship to be more fragile in some capacity. I quite like this as Civ bonus, it is very distinctly Roman, and as far as possible I would like to see this for all civs, things that are distinct and defining for that civilization.

Interesting, I experienced this in a game a few months back, I was kiting Spartans with Roman skirmisher cavalry, whenever I would have them move in formation some would just stop dead and get impaled by spears as a result, after a while I discovered that splitting my 70+ block into smaller blocks of 30+ made the problem go away and did an even better job at harassing lol

I see, thanks for the clarification

A question as someone who has not had the chance to play the Test Build, wasn't it planned to be Scythians and another nomadic type civ that would be added in? I know Germans had been considered for a while before but I thought they had come second to the Scythian/other civ addition given the results of a recent poll in the forum

Well they did conquer all the civs in question so um yeah lol But in all seriousness I do take your point, though I do not think having multiple roman civs is a good idea, it is better as they have done with the reforms technology that more or less sets up the late republic/early imperial era within the current early republic style Roman civ

True, though they do lack the siege tower for some reason, bit of an odd one that. Definitely agree here, the legionary and his donkey was a very iconic entity back in A23, probably the most Roman thing back then lol Was sad they changed it for a more generic looking sprite.

There are in fact battles that Rome won because of Elephants, maybe not many of them given the shortish time frame, but they are there. As for why or why not, I think its cool enough to be worthwhile, not everything has to be legionary focused in Roman civs.

A merc elephant would be great As a thought experiment I would assume a full metal cost, which going off the smaller African elephant would be 450 metal in total after converting food cost to metal. Given training is faster, and also knowing the limited acquisition that Rome has from Numidia, I would run with the elephant stables but cap it at 1 or maybe 2 buildings, that way production should be slower than other civs who could spam like four or five elephant stables so they can mass them fast. A cool side affect would be that now a Roman player could use captured elephant stables, which would be a fun niche feature.

Six to be exact. unit focus is fine but does not have to dictate everything. Not sure what exactly you mean by additional unit roster, their roster is still the same after the reforms tech.

This would be pretty epic, I always wished we could build the bridges from the scenario editor is Age II. Roads would be an interesting feature, most useful I think for shifting forces around your territory I would think, though aggressively building a road into your opponents land would be terribly funny as well

Sure, this is the best source I have been able to find so far, if anyone has a better source please post it. Putting it as a mercenary unit could definitely be one way of doing things https://warhistory.org/@msw/article/war-elephants-in-the-roman-army

The Imperial Era does not feature here, we talking about the time frame from the Second Punic War up to the first century BC. I believe there are enough wars in that time frame to make the justification.

Honestly I would love to see a limited option for roman war elephants, sadly few if any games let them have them in any shape or form. I read up on it and they apparently were supplied from Numidian allies for most of the second century BC, until Rome fell out with them which pretty much ended things, and that they were used in most of the Roman campaigns during that time frame. I don't suppose Delende Est has this option does it?

While the idea of putting troops behind walls is both historical and interesting, in the context of current gameplay it is not nearly as efficient as simply breaking the walls with catapults or rams, however there is the other usage of siege towers which is fire superiority, being able to overlook enemy fortifications and essentially clear them or support an assault on them. It is not like we can map an exact historical battlefield anyway. We do not build siege towers on site and then roll them up to the walls, and we also roll them over terrains they historically cannot go over, their very movement is largely ahistorical, so frankly I say add interesting features with the understanding that yes players will probably use it as an infantry carrier/tank or something equally amusing, but that is ok

That is fair, though I am not suggesting my idea because they are weak, but rather because I think it is interesting and a way to add some nuance to them

Thats all I play

Can be applied to a lot of things, like lacking catapults, or champion spears for dealing with champion cavalry, or x with insert appropriate missing unit that any one civ lacks. I do not think your siege tower idea is that strong because siege towers function like regular towers in terms of shooting, and I can simply swarm them with any combination of X melee troops and knock them out with cold steel, aside from the obvious usage of catapults and rams. Every civ gets rams and the majority have catapults. Oh and elephants if available, even champion cavalry if one is wealthy. Ultimately every civ has a counter to this in some shape or form

Why not? there is adequate historical precedent to shove a bolter on a siege tower, it would be epic and maybe encourage their use a little more

Ok, then for simplicity sake one would have to just add the bolt to the regular attack, I think its about a 3s interval and we do have the Ptolemaic bolters that are roughly that, so it shouldn't be that game breaking, also towers are 3 pop anyway and suitably expensive