suggestions Thread for posting suggestions for Alpha 27.

[Fabius]

I believe the traction trebuchet originated in Asia and then made its way down to middle east and the eastern Romans who adopted it in part i think because it proved more reliable. The Romans liked using them for field battles among other things.

Then later on it became the counterweight trebuchet.

[AIEND]

14 minutes ago, Fabius said:

我相信牵引投石机起源于亚洲，然后传到中东和东罗马人，我认为部分采用它是因为它被证明更可靠。 罗马人喜欢将它们用于野战等。

后来它变成了配重投石机。

It is generally believed that the traction trebuchet originated in China. We call it "礮Pao". This is the simplest but most effective weapon that uses the principle of leverage. We used it to drop bombs from the 12th to the 15th century.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

Here is another suggestion:

Hide enemy civilizations in the diplomacy window. In random games, it kind of ruins the surprise.

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 minute ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Here is another suggestion:

Hide enemy civilizations in the diplomacy window. In random games, it kind of ruins the surprise.

what can be is to hide their name and faction until you discover them on the map.

[Outis]

On 10/04/2022 at 11:31 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

More maps.

Bigger and better!

I think Atlas Valleys and Sahyadri Buttes by @LordGood are masterpieces. I love that they are variable rather than symmetric, so players have different advantages and disadvantages. I also love Neareastern Badlands and Greek Acropolis. I wish we had giant versions of these maps. I think performance is much better and we are ready .

[Lion.Kanzen]

25 minutes ago, Outis said:

Bigger and better!

I think Atlas Valleys and Sahyadri Buttes by @LordGood are masterpieces. I love that they are variable rather than symmetric, so players have different advantages and disadvantages. I also love Neareastern Badlands and Greek Acropolis. I wish we had giant versions of these maps. I think performance is much better and we are ready .

we need a gold rush(classic) and another where there are fruits be an essential part.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

2 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

we need a gold rush(classic) and another where there are fruits be an essential part.

full merc gold rush XD

[Fabius]

18 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

full merc gold rush XD

Every Carthaginian players dream map

[real_tabasco_sauce]

How about: Allow specs to flare, and allow settings toggle for spec flare visibility? 

[Stan`]

17 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

How about: Allow specs to flare, and allow settings toggle for spec flare visibility? 

Abuse, cheating ?

[Stan`]

2 hours ago, go2die said:

Do you cheat Stan? Interesting your answer... usually we see only issues with similar mindset... What about allow spec to flare with visibility to only specs too... 

No I have to assume the worst from players. I mean DDOS, rating fakery, insults, etc. So when we add a potentially annoying feature I have to take it into account.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

5 hours ago, Stan` said:

Abuse, cheating ?

no I mean for spec only. Like to show other specs. It would not be visible to players ofc.

Sorry I wasn't clear!

Edited April 23, 2022 by real_tabasco_sauce

[Yekaterina]

On 21/04/2022 at 7:12 PM, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Hide enemy civilizations in the diplomacy window. In random games, it kind of ruins the surprise.

That is indeed great if the initial civilisations are random. However, if the players chose their civilisations then you can simply remember who picked what. 

 

9 hours ago, go2die said:

Do you cheat Stan? Interesting your answer... usually we see only issues with similar mindset... What about allow spec to flare with visibility to only specs too... 

I like this idea, it will help with specs' discussions and analysis. 

 

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

People have been complaining about how powerful iberian cavalry is even without firecav. I think a main reason for this is how iberians are impervious to late-game raids on food eco (except for archer cav). An iberian player can put enough fields for full cavalry eco inside the cc and they can depend on that food income never being dirupted.

Perhaps it makes sense to decrease the amount of area covered by iberian walls. Perhaps making the maximum internal farm number at 6 or 7. I think this is doable but it might cause problems with stone/metal generation within walls. 

[AIEND]

14 分钟前，BreakfastBurrito_007 说：

人们一直在抱怨即使没有火骑兵也有多么强大的伊比利亚骑兵。 我认为其中一个主要原因是伊比利亚人如何不受游戏后期对食物生态的袭击（弓箭手骑士除外）。 一个伊比利亚玩家可以在 cc 中放置足够的场地供完整的骑兵生态使用，他们可以依赖于永不中断的食物收入。

也许减少伊比利亚墙覆盖的面积是有意义的。 也许将最大内部农场数量设置为 6 或 7。我认为这是可行的，但它可能会导致墙壁内产生石头/金属的问题。 

The problem is that metal resources don't work, most games solve this problem by making soldiers consume metal, and gold mines outside the initial base are easily harassed.

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

39 minutes ago, AIEND said:

The problem is that metal resources don't work, most games solve this problem by making soldiers consume metal, and gold mines outside the initial base are easily harassed.

That is completely unrelated to what I wrote earlier. I don't know how to respond.

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 hour ago, AIEND said:

The problem is that metal resources don't work, most games solve this problem by making soldiers consume metal, and gold mines outside the initial base are easily harassed.

other problem...

@wowgetoffyourcellphone

How are we doing with the idea of putting the mines away?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

3 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

How are we doing with the idea of putting the mines away?

What do you mean?  

[AIEND]

26 分钟前，BreakfastBurrito_007 说：

这与我之前写的完全无关。 我不知道该如何回应。

You think that the economy of the Iberians is protected by the city wall, so they can continue to produce food to supply the cavalry without fear of attack. In fact, as long as the cavalry is added with more metal costs, this "economic security" of the Iberians can be broken. ”, because no player will use walls to surround gold mines on the map.

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 minute ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

What do you mean?  

are very close to CC at the start.

Hadn't we talked about moving them outside a bit?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

If it wasn't for C-S concept, I'd suggest:

 

Melee Soldiers

• Food
• Metal

Ranged Soldiers

• Wood
• Metal

Exceptions: Scout Cavalry & Slingers (aka "Trash units")

• Food only

 

5 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

are very close to CC at the start.

Hadn't we talked about moving them outside a bit?

Right. The stone and metal mines right up against the CC are weird. Numerous Skirmish maps fix this, but it remains in random maps.

[AIEND]

8 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

如果不是 CS 概念，我建议：

 

近战士兵

• 食物
• 金属

远程士兵

• 木头
• 金属

例外：侦察骑兵和投石兵（又名“垃圾单位”）

• 仅食物

My point is
Melee infantry: more food + less metal.
Cavalry: More food + more metal.
Javelin: Less food + less wood + less metal.
Slinger: Less food + less stone.
Archer: Less food + more metal.

8 分钟前，wowgetoffyourcellphone 说：

正对着CC的石头和金属矿很奇怪。 许多小冲突地图解决了这个问题，但它仍然存在于随机地图中。

I feel that the current large gold mines and quarries should be replaced by small and fragmented gold mines and quarries.

Edited April 24, 2022 by AIEND

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

12 minutes ago, AIEND said:

Javelin: Less food + less wood + less metal.

I don't like 3 resource costs. I try to stick to only 2 if possible.

[AIEND]

14 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

我不喜欢3资源成本。 如果可能的话，我尽量只坚持 2 个。

That can also be food and wood，I think javelineer is also Trash units.

Edited April 24, 2022 by AIEND

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

13 minutes ago, AIEND said:

I feel that the current large gold mines and quarries should be replaced by small and fragmented gold mines and quarries.

My ideal situation: