I just provide some suggestions.
Your feedback should provide for Microsoft.
But you can also share them to let the team notice it.
I just provide some suggestions.
What I expected when I clicked on this post: “make aoe3 more like aoe2, bring back resource drop off sites, remove shipments, 1 pop for all units etc.”
After I read a few points: GOD this is brilliant. You really have an in-depth understanding of the game.
I can’t say I agree with everything (because I didn’t finish XD) but nice work and thanks for your efforts! I sincerely think the devs should read this.
They succeed in that mission even without stealth, TC doesn’t reveal stealth on all map, it will be too late when you see pikes in your base.
Blocking hunts is annoying but does not apply in any way with the balance. If you lost map control so hard that it becomes a problem, the game was over a long time ago. I’m pretty sure that booming and generating resources has much more impact on the game.
And your calculation works only with wonder, without it, Inca’s houses have a huge advantage in trickle rate.
But, anyway, applying so many changes to civs leads to worse balance than we have now. The current patch balance not that broken, I think it still near the 10% range (45%-55%) like it was on EP. Better to solve problems with unfair MU, and polishing two new civs, instead of reworking everything in the game.
But the QoL changes you’re offering are pretty good.
Yes and Llama can grow for food, but not permanent and need vils.
The unit will be fixed, not very feasible in game for rush.
Consider them as assistant would be better.
Card that changes Carolean to range resistance is crazy.
That makes Rifeman does much less damage to them.
Lakota no falcs or cannon can’t deal with that.
Here is one more things I wanna mention.
Game play balance
Some civs are designed to rush, yes.
However, the situation now is, if this civs rush, may be 50% win (even you rush still need to micro control very well). If this civs don’t rush, 100% lose.
This is not a RTS game should have.
Not true. They actually trade equally to dragoons in legacy (RE). Now that in DE, the ranged resistance of dragoons has been nerfed from 30% to 20%, Cav archers win dragoons all the time. The only issue they have is being bad at kiting and thus dragoons are superior to cav archers against heavy cavs. And only 2 civs have access to it. These 2 civs would prefer to play with their infantry most of the time.
Imo they need a speed buff. Or guard and imperial upgrade has to give them +1 range each. And I think they used to have inaccuracy on their shots (used to be back on legacy, not sure about DE). That has to be removed if they still have it.
I don’t think stealth action will be a big problem to destroy your building.
Oprichnik or Lakota cav with Charging ceremony are more dangerous than Heavy Infantry with stealth action.
If Heavy Infantry with stealth action is too powerful, Jaguar Knight will be powerful units to do it, but no one say Jaguar Knight is OP.
Maybe Inca still have very strong economy that should be nerfed by reducing trickle, but it’s different issue about Japanese Shrine, so the lower HP will be OK to suppress Shrine built everywhere.
Thanks! I still agree that you disagree on Supay Ceremony. It is very good point that I’ve never noticed before.
Oh! Svea Lifeguard!
This card is very OP, so I adjust the HP to +15%, but maybe it is still powerful; however, Carolean is very weak in Age 2. This unit is very unbalanced in this game.
I totally agree with you on this issue.
Rush civs are impossible to beat them by rush fail or no rush.
Very interesting and thought out. It would be cool for the developers to implement changes on this level
The Swedish Musketeer you will only see the shooting and then move away after switching modes, switch mode to charge when encountering riflemen and artillery, switch mode to escape when the battle is lost.
There are too many types of Inca aboriginal friends, I hope it can be fixed to 4 types
The Inca called the Inca Empire Tawantinsuyu, which means the alliance of the four places
As a Portugal player, very uninspiring, basically cheaper villagers.
Good effort on the feedback tho.
that is WAY too much dmg for longbows. the unit as much as people dont want to admit it is fine, it isn’t what should change for british.
not sure i overall agree with your wood change either:
for some units this isn’t a terrible change, esp hauds melee cav and tomahawk, but overall i dont think this is a good idea, units that cost wood are suppose to be more limited because of the wood cost, making cannons just cost coin would be a huge buff to cannons. and it also would be a huge buff to longbows.
this is a way too huge nerf to walls, here is thing: walls need to be worth it, you should never have to question if building a wall is a good idea, they are necessary for new players, and they are nesecary for treaty games or even just very lategame supremacy games to make sure things like oprichs don’t just run amok. it is already not fun dealing with these 1 dimensional siege units, and this will just make it worse.
i dont see the point of this. it is just going to make the game harder to understand and balance, the way it works now is fine, just give some minor buffs to the factions that need it (like dutch)
absolutely under no circumstance should france get a buff to a card that already does way too much.
frankly i disagree with quiet a lot of your change suggestions.