Feedback

[bioinfornatics]

Dear,

I have play on multiplayer and they are some feedback:

In first civ are unbalanced, what should be do:

- hero should be unique

* it is more realistic

* prevent again mass heroes build

- celt unit are not enough strong and like they are not good on water increase the power of his unit should be done

the first one is more important, by example carthaginian have a elephant heroes (do not rember his name) where is overkill

thanks a lot for this games

[feneur]

The hero units will indeed be limited, and balancing will come (mostly in the Beta phase, currently we're focusing on adding new features). But thanks for your thoughts Even saying things which are planned can be useful as we know we're not the only ones with the same ideas

[bioinfornatics]

And for note: allied unit should be able go to allied siege ram

[feneur]

And for note: allied unit should be able go to allied siege ram

Maybe. It does sound like it could cause some unnecessary confusion without bringing all that much benefit. I mean if you have a siege ram of your own that you intend to put some units in and then when you try to put them there you can't be cause it's already full (because your ally has dedcided to garrison his units in your ram), that's going to be confusing. And then when you ungarrison the units you cannot control them. But it would quickly be obvious that it is your ally's units, so that's not a big issue on its own. I think it's more of a problem in that your ally might suddenly have his units somewhere he didn't want to (if you are able to ungarrison his units, and if you are not your ally would be able to partly remove control of your units so that's not a good option imho), instead of right in the middle of the fight they might be somewhere on the way or in your base and your ally would have to find them and give them a new move order (and who knows, might decide that since they already are in your city he could just as well send some more troops there and attack you instead ) etc. It might not be a big issue, but I'm just not convinced the benefits outweigh the negative sides

Also, hopefully we'll have a proper co-op mode where two or more people share control of the same "player" (in the in-game/game code sense, i.e. the units/buildings belong to one in-game player and share the same unit color, LOS etc, but one or more people, or AIs for that matter, would share control over it). I'm not saying that it would completely substitute what you are asking for, my point is more that it would allow for closer cooperation and working together. Which in turn would mean that the players (human players) who want a gameplay where they share responsibilities and truly work together would get their share of that. And that would in its turn mean that while the use of the feature you suggest would not be removed the need would to some degree

(I'm longwinded as usual, but if nothing else the first word summarizes the rest of the post )

[historic_bruno]

AoK allowed transporting your own units in an ally's siege ram. To be honest, I found it confusing and not very useful, because as Erik says, you can't control where the units go, but also it's not clear what mix of units is in the siege ram at a glance. AoK provided some limited controls, I believe the ram's owner could unload all units but the joining player could only unload his own. There's also the issue of multiple players competing for the limited spots in the ram, and the difficulty for the owner in coordinating it all. We might be able to improve on how AoK implemented this, but still it seems low priority.

[bioinfornatics]

we could have a lock icon to all unit / fortress / tower who allow garrison up right to the unit icon

and by clicking on it which lock / unlock the player is able to allow or not allied garrisoning.

The allied player should be to able garrison and un-garrison this unit.

If they are allied unit into a structure and the player choose to lock allied unit go out automatically

Edited January 22, 2012 by bioinfornatics