Lose resources for deleting building foundation

I think if you place a building or wall foundation and then delete it, you should not get all your resources back. You should lose about 25% or 50% of the resources used to plop the building/wall down. I prefer 50% loss. (EDIT: Even 10% would be fine, since I can’t get any takers at 25% or 50%. I just think it’s weird that doing this is completely free.)

This would, in a sense, be a slight penalty for not being more careful with your placement or timing of your placement, and/or encourages you to go with your initial placement more often and deal with the consequences of it (e.g., if you get attacked somewhere after placing and want your resources back to make military instead or to move the building elsewhere, then too bad, you lose at least some).

I always assumed you lose some resources any time you delete a foundation, so was surprised to actually find out you don’t

AoE should be like chess in this regard. Once you touch a piece in chess you must move it. Similarly. Once you’ve placed a foundation in AoE, you’ve committed resources and shouldn’t get all of them back if you change your mind, imo


Too much penalty for a miss click


It’s totally fine the way it is now. Why punish players for placing foundations? It’s no sense.


It’s punishing for the sake of punishment imo


With the current building placement mechanics it’s absolute nonsense.
Imagine you want to make a castle drop and the opponent just places palisades everywhere…

1 Like

You do lose resources for deleting a partially built building. The completion percentage of the building equals the percentage of its cost that isn’t refunded.


There should be some, though. Even 10% is better, more realistic, and funner than nothing

I see it as an incentive for you/us to be more careful when placing buildings, too

In chess, you learn to not touch a piece unless you know you’re going to move it, since you can’t change your mind after touching the piece. That’s not punishment for the sake of punishment. It encourages to you think about things and make sure know what you’re doing before you do it. And the regret of touching the piece and then realizing afterward that you would’ve rather moved a different piece is palpable.

I see nothing wrong with having a similar mechanism in AoE and think it would be funner. It always feels weird that I can plant and take away foundations for absolutely free. Feels a little gamey that it’s completely free to put down and take away 1,000 building foundations and not lose any resources at all. Why shouldn’t there be some palpable anxiety or resource loss for realizing right after you placed a foundation that you meant to do something different or put it somewhere else, or the enemy’s movements elsewhere on the map after placing the foundation causes you to reconsider?

Sorry, but I don’t understand your example. Can’t your opponent place palisades everywhere already? I’m not proposing changing anything regarding building placement mechanics. I’m just saying if you make a foundation and delete it, that should cost you a little bit.

If there are building placement mechanic issues, that’s beyond the scope of this topic

Oh, awesome! Sorry for not double-checking that aspect before posting. I’ll edit my OP. So, then, I just think it’s weird you can delete your foundation and get all resources back


Exactly my thought. This suggestion seems already be part of the game.

Wasnt their some ‘grace period’ as well? Like if you delete it within the first 10%, then you can still the full value back, while after the 10%, your rule applies. Or does your rule apply always?

Arent foundations not just buildings and does the rule apply for them as well?

Chess is an open, sequential game with perfect information. AoE is not.
It makes sense that the implementation of core mechanics such as the one you mention take the nature of the game into account.
That’s pure game theory

Game thoery suggests games like AoE should create challenges, tension, risks, consequences for poor decisions, and rewards for good ones. Putting down a foundation and then getting to scrap it for free is not giving any consequnces for a poor decision

1 Like

Lag alone makes me want to reject this proposal with all my strengths.

Lol. What if we lived in a perfect lag-free world? Regardless, the lag argument could be made for anything. “Oops, I shouldn’t have attacked that boar.” “Oops, I shouldn’t have bought 500 stone at the market.” “Oops, I shouldn’t have moved my horses to near that castle.”

The way I see it, as soon as you put down a foundation, resources are already immediately deducted from your account. Why would you expect to get full resources back

You never had teammates that asked you to remove the foundation of a castle because they wanted to put something else there? I had, multiple times.
So no thanks.
And lag-free world doesn’t exist, so…
Also, logic doesn’t apply to AoE2 game, how could bombard towers fire at their base then? :face_with_monocle:

Yep, and the same goes for the opposing team. Creates organic variables and issues you must dynamically overcome. So you just lost 25 or 50 stone in that example if you delete the foundation… oops! Flares and more communication may be warranted, or be more open to adaptability, I suppose.

I know Arabia is the map everyone loves here due to its precise perfection, predictability, and equalness, so I don’t know that I will win any hearts over… and that’s fine. I think it’s a missed opportunity, though. Having to adapt to a poorly placed building is possibly a little too organic for most ranked MP eSport players

In a sense I agree with you, I just cannot see that being implemented as in chess, as you do not have perfect information in AoE by design.
You cannot fairly punish a bad move as you would in a chess game where you have everything (except time) to make the perfect move

I’m pretty sure the most tryhards players would happen to be the one to adapt to this change the best. You would be more likely to screw up everyone else more with this change. Which even if it didn’t, would still be a dumb idea. The game already takes away ressources from you the second you start the foundation. If the foundation happens to be destroyed by the enemy you lose everything, even if the foundation only had 1 HP. Sounds like mistakes are already punished enough.

1 Like

Yes, surely they’d adapt well, but they wouldn’t like to, was my point. It’s a common theme that if your sheep starts, say, 50 pixels farther away from your TC than your enemy’s experience, or the map isn’t perfectly mirrored, it’s an imperfect algorithm and needs fixing. So, I could imagine if the same players accidentally placed a foundation 10 pixels too far to the right, they’d want to delete it and rebuild it penalty-free rather than adapt to the less-than-ideal location. The desire and need for perfection would outweigh everything, as there’s not much tolerance for random, organic variables, so to speak

The resources are immediately spent as soon as you place a foundation, so I was just super surprised to learn that you get 100% of it back if you delete it. I assumed for a while you lost it all, which I’d be okay with, too :wink: I wonder if there is an RTS-like game out there that isn’t so forgiving with this particular element that made me assume resources are lost. Do the original CD and HD/FE versions of all AoE titles behave like AoE2:DE current state?

In respect to deleting a 0 HP building yes, even AoC refunded 100%. Also, the penalty would be kind of pointless. You already lose resources for deleting a partially built foundation, so these two concepts seem to overlap a bit too much.

1 Like

Oh, cool. Thanks for specifying that of the old versions

Interesting that you say there would be overlap and that would be undesirable. From my shoes, and I know I’m unique here, the lack of overlap bothers me… because they’re so highly correlated. The supplies have been sent to the foundation, as evidenced by wood and materials appearing. You’re saying a villager pounding one nail in is what takes it out of imaginary fantasy land and into palpable construction land? On the contrary, my mind sees its physical placement as the first concrete step of construction and an intent to build has been fully established

I think the game considers an unbuilt foundation more as a plan, rather than an actual foundation. It’s just a way for the game to visualize to the user, here’s to be built a building.

1 Like