julius1

that sounds like a good idea. It's annoying when siege units are picked of by archers.unless they have an upgrade that gives them fire arrows..

I don't think there's any solution to stop people from spamming walls. But raising the price on them seems like it might work. I think the walls should not only cost a significant amount of resources but should also take longer to build. i think you should have a choice between simple wooden walls and stone walls. Wooden walls will be easier and quicker to build while stone walls are more expensive and take longer (i mean way longer) to build. That way when you break through a wall the player can't just rebuild them in the middle of the siege. i hate busting through walls in AoE3 just to see a player rebuild them 5 lines deep in less than 1min.

Komenos, the only problem i see with the whole walls being very strong thing is that people will just spam produce walls 10-20 lines deep. but then again they already do that in AoE3 lol. i think infantry should be able to do damage to walls but not be able to completely destroy them. Infantry should be able to get walls health down to a quarter of it's health but siege equipment has to finish the job.

alright cool.

right. You guys should make a formation or stance for certain units or civ's "Celt's and Iberian s" so that they can't be seen in the bushes or trees, but they also can't move or attack while their hiding or in that stance."guerrilla warfare"

e info i needed in the open source section

lol wait!!! will certain civilizations have special formations that no other civ can use? For example: Romans can use testudo while other civ's can't?

ahh ok. whelp i don't think i have anymore questions. thanks for the info

thanks for the link. Woot!! i came up with village cap idea =P. oh and i have another Q. Let's say during a little skirmish i send my cavalry behind my enemy's units and basically flank them. will the enemy units automatically turn around or will they continue to face forward in the direction they were attacking and be unable to turn around.

Alright so rushing wont be completely useless but will be harder to do. So will "Phases" unlock a population cap or new technology you can purchase? Thorfinn The Shallow Minded, you mentioned something about the Roman Hastati being able to use or alternate between using their sword and pilum when they reach elite rank. Will there be a specific number of pilum they will be able to throw or will their pilum be infinite?

Ok so will these "phases" cost the player any resources? Because the whole point of rushing is to either cripple their economy in a significant way, or simply destroy them. Attempting to destroy them early wont work and will hurt both of you because he has a fast defense already in place "citizen soldiers" and unless the phases cost resources u can do little to pick at his economy without having to attack soldiers because a gathering party could turn into an army at any given time.

Ok...I know that this is an old topic but I've been doing some thinking and i was just wondering how rushing would be an effective, or even useful tactic in this game since your gatherers are also your military. So its not like your raiding gatherers its more like little skirmishes because those gatherers can defend themselves and can easily be replaced. And since there aren't any "Ages", it kind of defeats the purpose of a rush? LML am i right or am i right??

That's pretty cool.

when can we use the Romans in the Alpha!?!

Which civ to you think has the best advantage in the game based on their pros and cons? I'm guessing between the Roman's, Hellenes, or Carthage.