Classic-Burger

@wowgetoffyourcellphone any idea?

I don't have much experience with JS, so how do you change that? I mean, to make it dynamic?

That would imply that not only the name, it sounds like the concept of evolving one civ into another. I have that feeling.

That's definitely beyond a mod.

Write your question in Spanish and we'll try to understand it from there.

I don't understand you, what language do you speak natively?

civ.js you can change the name. Inside Public/simulation/data

I'm more confused.

Change the civ name?

Impressive.

Gorgeous.

Pettry nice look.

If you replace citizens with slaves to have more soldiers... Slaves should be fewer and more efficient.

Does anyone know how I register the command in the interface? I mean, similar to the patrol, garrison and guard icons.

Colonization tech. in the first phase and put a more coherent price on it for the first phase. Elephants. I am against elephants in phase 2 except Maurya. Siege Tech, Reducing the metal cost is not that expensive to reduce the rest of the cost, unless the goal is to keep the cost low to speed up gameplay.I'm more into long games than short ones. There should be a mode for short games of 15-20 minutes. CC is very weak in P3, it would need to be significantly improved with civic technologies.It would also be nice if the Ram had slow development and upgrades like in AoE. I enjoy the technical improvements and the arms race( evolutive/adaptation) in strategy games.

Yes.They hide units with a command in the forest and grasslands and can be ambushed or simply to hide. LoS thing is influenced by AoE II where the game is more difficult due to a slow start. And at the beginning it is slow and the low LoS makes you blind in the map, since you only depend on scout, because civilians have very low LoS ( line of sight). Nomad starts are better in AoE II.

I think it can be done with a good number of archers. I don't think it would be effective; I remember using Kushite archers behind a line of spears and pikes. But making a "Rush" without riders and without melee infantry to hunt lumberjacks seems difficult to me. And expecting the enemy to have no cavalry. Unlike AoE, cavalry is more prevalent in this game. Skirmish cavalry is quickly available. This is where you have to do some work to differentiate all the missile CS units. In the current game, cavalry is the best option to rush/raid farms and lumberjacks (warehouses). It would also help to nerf the LoS and introduce technologies to improve it again. This would make the enemy feel claustrophobic from not seeing anything and having more blind spots. It would be interesting to be able to hide archers and skimishers as it happened in Praetorians.

Ideally, there should be different ways for archers to be good, not just one way. Changing the subject, the champion pikes need to be better, I never chose pikes in a Seleucid reform.

Not a long one. I don't know how long an archer rush would take in practice. Many matches last 30-40 minutes.

I think I should clarify that the concept of "archer rush" I have in mind is in a early stage between phase 1 and 2. Probably within 20 minutes or so.

Neither of them excels in archery. There should have been one and the Kushites had that reputation as tough warriors for centuries. What are the Kushites good at?

I forgot that the Macedonian champion was Hoplite style and not a phalanx, I must be thinking of the Ptolemaic champion.

Okay, but how do you know who I'm replying to? Archers along with ranged cavalry are very good units for hunting villagers.

Other technologies are also needed. We'd need to nerf the default LoS and then add two or three techs for buildings and units.