Deicide4u

@Tapothei It's actually funny how you can just mass hundreds of units and capture full HP CCs and Fortresses without any siege. Maybe I just prefer destruction

For better or worse, capture mechanic is here to stay. You can capture buildings that are not in your territory, but they will decay to Gaia over time. Unless you leave enough units inside when you capture it.

They represent more or less basic units for each civilization. There is also a balance consideration of which units are available.

@DesertRose, they have better base gather rates for their workers, which makes them faster. Maybe they also amass larger armies, but I'm not sure if that is true with this release. Medium AI is the only "fair" difficulty where the AI gets no resource advantages or disadvantages. Otherwise, it's not smarter.

Please share your replays against the AI here. Here's a couple from me. AI difficulty is Medium, but it feels more difficult to beat than even Hard AI from A27. As usual, there's a lot of floating resources around CarthageVSPersia_M.zip RomeVS_Sparta_M.zip

Civilians gather food better and wood somewhat slower than CS. My tech idea doesn't affect food and wood gather rates. It allows players to rely on civilians in the late game to gather stone and metal at equal or greater rates than using soldiers. While you already can use civilians to gather metal (and send all your CS to fight), it is not as efficient as leaving ~24 CS in your base to gather metal while you fight. You would typically try to maximize metal gathering for champions or upgrades, that's why I left stone out.

It's a general technology not unique to any civilization. So, yes.

Name: Logistics Effect: Civilians carry +10 more resources, gather stone and metal 100% faster. Cost: 400 Wood, 300 Metal, unlocked after Hand-Cart in the City phase. The intent of this late-game tech is to make Civilians still useful after the population boom slows down and you start to replace them with more CS. Also, this makes Wheelbarrow and Hand-Cart technology more useful in the long run/worth getting. It could also be one way to test if any more changes to the Civilians are useful or not.

Why, though? I think giving melee units pierce damage makes no sense. It's also much easier to balance when you know that melee = hack and ranged = pierce. But, people chose to give "trash" (w/o metal cost) melee units high pierce damage, to artificially nerf them against buildings, thus promoting the capture mechanic.

Armor penetration created a bunch of balance issues in AoE2. Armor shouldn't ever be ignored, but we do need to correct the damage reduction formula to not give so much reduction at lower levels.

Use masses of ranged units, preferably ranged cavalry. Once the blob of Spartan death comes close, simply run away until you're at the safe distance. Nothing worse than dealing with annoying hit and run attacks, trust me. Keep up with the upgrades as Spartiates have a lot of base armor.

It makes the most sense to give javelin throwers the damage multiplier, but that would severely nerf an already underused, slow unit. The decision to retain damage multipliers against cavalry for spearmen was purely based on balance, to counter the cavalry's naturally greater speed and higher stats. Otherwise, we got rid of counter units in A17, if I recall correctly.

Ensemble Studios knew something when they were making AoE1. Yes, ancient societies were dominated by men. The original game developers of 0 A. D. didn't give an explanation why they chose to represent women as a separate unit. Citizen-Soldier concept surely played a part in it, but they could have done this without representing women as farmers. I've played almost all of the original first 10 releases, and even created a mod for one of them. The economy then wasn't so focused on wood, so you could distribute your income more efficiently. The game always had a pure eco unit that costs only food, but this unit isn't efficient at its job. It's also unfortunate that unit was literally a woman. Now that this unit has both male and female variants, the developers could try creating a real, effective economic unit by R30, for example. Hope this makes sense.

So that you don't have 50 females and 5 males in the first 5 minutes of the game. Among other things. Read the official announcement of R28. Someone else already created a similar thread.

Micro. Your APM is better spent elsewhere.

It's not the standard type of latency lag there. Only some sluggishness during a long match with many, many units. It's gotten much better since A27.1.

You said, "the people who actually play the game", as if the only ones playing the game are the people you met in the lobby from your narrow social circle. I will not discuss anything with you anymore, as you're clearly got something personal against me if you've bothered to read my post history from that far.

Ah, so the "real players" are only players on the lobby for you? You do know that vast majority of this game's player base is outside of the lobby, do you? This game cares not for your ideological feelings. Take that somewhere else, please. Now you sound like you're arguing about something that this change tried to correct. If you'd read the release statement, you'd know this. EDIT: On topic, thanks for the mod @Atrik. We should correct the voices in the next release.

Such a strong argument. You should be a game developer, I'm sure many would love to play your games. Who cares how people call them in the lobby, there's so many players who don't care about the lobby. Or who don't even know that the game has a lobby, for that matter. Now, this is written in bad faith. It was called "woman", because that's what it looked like. You could argue that original developers should have gone with the standard gendered villager unit, but people wanted to try something different. AoE is a great franchise, but it doesn't need yet another clone. Almost no one used men to gather crops in the fields. Only the AI and some dedicated Sparta player with a lot of Helots. I really struggle with understanding your opposition to this change.

Congratulations to the team on this milestone release! I have been playing a few games and already noticed some big changes. Especially in the AI, it has gotten much better. It can be a challenge even on Medium difficulty. Gendered Civilians is such a major change. I remember suggesting this change some time back, and I'm glad it was included in the game. It helps some players who like to distinguish between economic and military unit roles. It is also logical to have civilians (or pure economic units) of both genders in the game. GUI scale sharpness is also a great fix. As for the Germans, I had a such a surprise when I sent my clubmen to chop wood I don't think I'll like playing with them, but they're nice. Someone mentioned better performance. Maybe in multiplayer, I didn't feel the increase in performance in my SP matches. Here's to many more great releases!

I can see only a small flame, but maybe there's a bigger arson on a different frame.

A German and an Italian enter a bar. Perfectly normal conversation ensues.

Some things to think about for release 29 or 30. 1) Only buildings that can be captured are production buildings and Civic Centers. Any other building cannot be captured, including Houses that have "Fertility Festival" researched and Fortresses. 2) To compensate, introduce three levels of building armor classes. "Civic" or "Civilian" structures will have ~30% hack resistance. "Military" structures (Barracks, Stables, Arsenals, Elephant Stables) will have ~60% hack resistance. "Fortification" structures (Walls, Towers and Fortresses) will have a highest ~80% hack resistance. Pierce and siege resistance doesn't have to be changed, except for structures belonging to the "Civic" class. This should massively simplify game balance and solve the Capture and Delete meta once and for all.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone Careful, you might actually make me like AI.

Cavalry was always at the fore-front in every major historical battle. So, cavalry first, then infantry. Champions are tougher, so they maybe should be in front of CS in a formation. Another logic would be that CS are a good fodder, so we should place CS in front of champions. This is also more historically accurate, as many armies reserved their elite troops for later engagements, when the enemy was exhausted by "fodder".