True, you never want the enemy to destroy your own buildings, but if they do, you will gain a small benefit. Especially in late game, that 2 stone from walls, or even 10 stone from a gate is a nice thing, but gaining back 150 stone from a castle destroyed would be really useful. Not to mention the wood gained.
Stone structures only give you 25% stone, as opposed to 50% for the rest (wood). I figured giving back 50% stone would be broken.
I assume this would be more useful in team games rather than 1vs1 but it can also has its uses in 1vs1.
It’s here, post 135/148
Cavalry and Archer civ. (actually, just Skirmisher) Today’s meta is either archers or cavalry, so I wanted to create a civ that’s good against archers and cavalry but weak against infantry. Bonuses: Mill and Lumbercamp upgrades provide +2 extra carry capacity each for Farmers and Lumberjacks. Hussar upgrades free. Skirmishers +1 attack starting castle age and another +1 attack in imperial age. Unique Units: Portar (Unique Halberdier Upgrade; like Imperial Camel Rider or Imperial Skirmishe…
Wanting the Romanians isn’t. Spamming the forum with the same concept over and over again with practically no changes is. Try to talk about other things. You sound like a broken record.
There are changes.
Yes, the main theme is Romanians. Because as I said, I want the Romanians in AoE2. But every topic is different. It has the same theme, Romanians, over and over again. But it’s not the same concept over and over again. Every topic talks about different things or makes different civ concepts.