Thalatta

Some have complained about the very existence of CS. Others say that it's an intrinsic characteristic of the game. Of course they historically make sense, but given what you say, and to find a middle ground, maybe they could "upgrade" between roles (it's actually, and should be called, a "switch", since it's reversible, similarly as how the Immortals "upgrade" between spear and bow). To reduce micro, and considering that it's not good to fight while carrying resources (because of loot, and I don't remember if it also penalises stats), there could be a "Call to Arms" button (instead of just some unassigned hotkey, as I think it is now) to make the selected CS leave resources at their closest dropsite and upgrade to soldier role, which could then be queued with whatever order. @Emacz, that would look a bit like what you were proposing of having CS gather their weapons, although from dropsites, and those who are not carrying resources wouldn't even need to go there, since it just tries to solve the actual problem @Nicolaus_von_Kues mentioned. As previously discussed, one could make them go to the Barracks or CC to actually take or leave weapons, but maybe this would be too much, and it's just an alternative to do things, not that one makes more sense than the other from a game point of view.

That's why I've started to review each civilisation (although maybe I'll give up before going through all of them), pointing out mistakes and proposing relevant additions concerning the time period of the game (with preceding important characteristics taken as Civilisation Bonuses), while quoting authoritative sources, not with the idea to use necessarily everything, but to take from there. For now I've only done it for the Spartans, and the Athenians are coming soon, but it's a very slow and consuming process: I think for the Athenians I've gone through 3000 to 4000 pages of books and papers over the last few weeks, and all that has to be translated to what can be used in a game. One of the reasons historical RTS like AoE were so successful is that they actually taught something.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone does a great job adapting many historical details, and that's a lot to say from a insufferable perfectionist like me

I was thinking that because it seems you'll need way more stats for some units (for kinds of damage, range, spread, etc), then icons would give you space for a 4th column, if not also a 5th one.

@Nicolaus_von_Kues I agree, although regarding "Imagine an RTS where you add physiological needs; it would be realistic but not logical or believable", I don't see why it wouldn't be believable, maybe what you mean convincing as something viable. Regarding the rest, what you say is key to understand well written fiction and fantasy: many tend to dismiss critiques on believability of those shows because there's magic, dragons or whatever in it already anyway, completely missing the point of internal consistency. But we have gone quite off-topic

Very nice, clear, and useful. I hope something like this is eventually implemented in the base game. I guess it's also a mock-up because there are a very few small issues. But my questions are: does hovering over classes give some info regarding them? If so, maybe showing them as tags would be nice. Are those base stats (which I'd state with small icons, their names shown if hovering over them), or already include the applied techs effects? If so, it would be nice to have some break down of that anyway, maybe by hovering over them. Finally, when I see that aura, I wonder if it's "passive" or "active" (if there are active auras at all), and if that wouldn't be better as a Formation effect or similar.

That’s nice since it's the historical order. But what do people do with Fields in the late game? Just abandon or delete them? And with Corrals after building Ice Houses?

I think the same things should be indicated by the same icons in both the Civilization Overview and Technological Tree, otherwise there’d be a confusing multiplicity of icon representations, and both would look aesthetically disconnected.

Actually, I think I'd need to see the Structure Tree at the same time. Maybe there could be a way to show what's unique there, making text more necessary in the Civilization Overview (not to be redundant in that everything would be just icons). And now that I see, maybe everything following something like the Maurya Heroes structure would work nicely as a combination of graphics and text. And I'd add the Catafalque Bonuses below Team Bonuses, to fill that gap and remove that item from the menu.

There was a discussion regarding whether some people prefer icons (like me), and others text. I think the conclusion was that it could be left for the player as an option. An alternative layout I can think of to show the high amount of info more efficiently (and following also from other games) is the structure of the 2nd one, with the icons of the 1st one, no text (or with name tags like the Heroes on the 1st layout), with the explanation as tooltip when hovering the mouse. One could also have the option to show text beside the icon (or just text, without the icon), but the more experienced players could then choose only icons as a faster reference. I also liked more the upper right images from the 1st layout. Another thing I was thinking about (coming soon in my next batch of suggestions) is that I'd put Catafalque Bonuses inside Civilization Overview to present and concentrate all information from a given civ better (although this would add even more info to this screen).

@CoyoteTango I, and many here, agree, as you can see in my suggestion: This is known and discussed, as is maintaining formations during attacks, I think some have been working on it a bit, but it could be that others are against it, although I fail to see the appeal of preferring fighting blobs of units instead.

Sure, I also only play SP, and I've argued that's what over 90% of players actually do, so it cannot be overlooked as it usually is (if growing the game is among the priorities). But, ideally, whatever is implemented for SP shouldn't be a source of unfairness in MP, and that's why @wowgetoffyourcellphone observation is valuable. Preferably certain things should be automatically banned from MP, but for some reason this doesn't happen, and it has been many times a source of conflict among players.

I've never done anything regarding my suggestions, hoping the ones that resonated more with many would get eventually picked up, since I'm quite reluctant on adding formal requests to the hundreds around. I think @guerringuerrin mentioned that at some point he might do a PR with the better accepted ones, but no idea if something happened. These look nice. Crowded, but tidy enough for that not to be a problem. I have not read everything, but I'm confused about some decisions, for example the penteconter is not an Athenian thing, and was used for centuries before the start of the game. If you want, later on I can make a list of things that seem too inaccurate, with substitute proposals.

@wzyas you are not saying anything that has not already been discussed in the link I've sent you, even in more depth regarding balance between what is automated in relation to added complexity. Please read that thread, you might find some interesting things being discussed. Now, if that is indeed the case for higher-level players, then I find this argument quite convincing. It would make things easier for lower-level players, without making it unfair in relation to higher-level players, which I find a desirable feature.

Is it my turn to ask (again) for a knock back/down effect? Yes, it is realistic (there's a video around of a woman being flung by a "small" elephant), and indeed it would be nice to have it, even when impacted by a cavalry charge, and certain spear/pike "formations" could reduce/cancel it (ideally from the frontal direction only).

In case you will want it, these two are against Very Hard Aggressive AI, both playing with the Athenians. In the first one I outcompeted the AI on economy early game right at the beginning, then it seems I stopped paying too much attention to it. For the second one I’m only barely outcompeted in the first couple of minutes (I guess took a few seconds to set my dropsites, resources being far from the CC). I’m not using auto-queue anymore, to get used to how apparently most people play.

Agreed, like something along the lines of Rome TW selection screen: Yes, that's the positioning I had in mind. Also (related but more in general), in Learn to Play, Catafalque Overview is stated, but the window has as title Catafalque Bonuses, which is a better name to avoid repetition with Civilisation Overview, but I think it would be even better to put Catafalque Bonuses inside Civilisation Overview. This would streamline the menu better, and for this Civ Browser, only two buttons would be needed above "Pick Random Civ".

Of course not, but I was having in mind some marginal use like using that wood to set some small fires and such, so they should give very little wood. It just seemed more realistic than leaving them with 1 food (what if one wants that food?), with the available resource change being a cleaner "completion" of the food gathering process, and the wood gathering presented as a new option.

Maybe buttons to also view Structure Tree, Civilisation Overview and Catafalque Bonuses from there would be useful.

@wzyas I think there are mods that already handle your first two points. As usual, it would be nice for some, but not for others. I think this is an example of letting the game play for you, as discussed in: I agree it would be nice to have this in the base game. You didn't say what for, exactly. If, as @Grautvornix says, it's to let them regenerate, I'm always for adding little details that enhance realism and complexity, as long as micro and bloatedness is not unacceptably increased. The way I'd implement it is that after fruits are depleted, the fruitless bush/tree remains, and one can then gather its wood (which is otherwise ignored by those already gathering wood, thus, you'd need to manually order their cutting down), or choose to leave it and wait for fruit to appear again after some time. I'd do something similar with all renewable resources, but, again, these things have already been discussed, and there's some people that usually push back against these changes (see below, and read around, just use the search tool). I find "balance" considerations unconvincing since some general regeneration rate could be set as an option, and none to low values shouldn't affect present gameplay in any noticeable way (and high values shouldn't be that high, I see it more as a way to say "yes, this game takes this into account, unlike most RTS!").

Here on Medium AI (on Very Hard I don't outcompete economy early game, but I play quite intuitively, no videos or tips to know optimal build order, for now at least).

Totally agree:

Can you control just gaining resistance from ranged attacks, for example? What would that be, exactly?

Just to give you a heads up, I'm preparing a Thoughts on the Athenians post, with naval combat reserved for its Part II, where I’ll briefly explain how it really was, and what could be done about it to make it more realistic.