Jump to content

CC limit = 1?


Gurken Khan
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 分钟前,Lion.Kanzen 说:

昨天我和他们一起玩所以...升级军事殖民地到完整的CC怎么样?

There is a difference in the footprint of the two. In fact, I don't think it's bad to keep the current state, but Colony should also be able to study P2 and P3, and be able to train heroes.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thephilosopher said:

the thought of building a new CC is one that never even occurs to me. The military colony is a superior building for expansions.

I like the MC, it's cheaper, faster to build & gives me access to archers. CCs give a larger area, though.

What bugged me more than (temporarily) not being able to build a CC was that I couldn't figure out why, so I decided to finally bring it up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only plus side to this 'feature' that you the player gains is that if your opponent captures your colony and happens to be Romans (there may be others I woudn't know)  the only option for training from the building is women which may make holding on to it a little more difficult.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gurken Khan said:

I like the MC, it's cheaper, faster to build & gives me access to archers. CCs give a larger area, though.

What bugged me more than (temporarily) not being able to build a CC was that I couldn't figure out why, so I decided to finally bring it up.

I'm glad you did bring it up! It's nice to know the options available.

The archer can be useful. The other MC unit I like is the merc melee infantry unit. It's a good unit to use against rams. The merc cav that comes out of the MC is, imo, pretty much useless, though. The champion cav out of the stable is way better.

Edited by thephilosopher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Stan` said:

Can't it be an interesting differentiation if made more explicit, or if it comes with bonii ?

I don't see the connection to the hero, but the total obscurity is what I really don't like. (I've actually been wondering for years why the CC button is greyed out and becomes available at some point. Even if we were to assume I wasn't the brightest candle on the cake, I don't think we should have mechanics that much in the dark.)

I think the MCs are already a strong bonus to the civs that have them, so I'd say please make it more explicit, but I don't think additional bonii are necessary. What could be reconsidered imho is the tie to the hero, which also means CCs aren't available until some time into p3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

I don't see the connection to the hero, but the total obscurity is what I really don't like. (I've actually been wondering for years why the CC button is greyed out and becomes available at some point. Even if we were to assume I wasn't the brightest candle on the cake, I don't think we should have mechanics that much in the dark.)

I think the MCs are already a strong bonus to the civs that have them, so I'd say please make it more explicit, but I don't think additional bonii are necessary. What could be reconsidered imho is the tie to the hero, which also means CCs aren't available until some time into p3.

Supposedly these successor heroes from Macedonian Alexander founded cities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Supposedly these successor heroes from Macedonian Alexander founded cities.

Yeah, well I'm no historian, but what I get is that without Seleucus I we wouldn't have the Seleucids to begin with, and while Antiochus III was able to restore some, it kinda went downhill under Antiochus IV. So the connection with the available heroes to CCs doesn't seem too compelling to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Stan` said:

Can't it be an interesting differentiation if made more explicit, or if it comes with bonii ?

I think the differentiation is them being able to build a military colony. Also allowing the cc reduces the differentiation from my view :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

im thinking we should have phase 4.

2 and 3 are short. 

having a 4th phase doesn't change phase 1 and 2 being short. One would need to redesign them so that they actually provide different gameplay options, instead of just being phases you rush through to p3. So I don't think that's a good argument.

I'm not against p4, but it has t be filled with something meaningful and unless most of DE's concepts are adapted I don't see this happening.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, maroder said:

having a 4th phase doesn't change phase 1 and 2 being short. One would need to redesign them so that they actually provide different gameplay options, instead of just being phases you rush through to p3. So I don't think that's a good argument

I'm still thinking. I know that would not change the previous.

We should to test the requirements first expand technologies then...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...