I can see that, but isn’t the same thing achieved while you hover your mouse over the plot of land and you see the perimeter highlight? So, these concepts overlap a bit, which is a reason why you were voting against it before 
I suppose placing the foundation is akin to sending the word out, and just ‘hovering’ with the foundation is more akin you thinking about sending the word out to build
2 Likes
I also see that unbuilt buildings as plans, as no resources are actually spent.
In particular,
- units can move freely on unbuilt stuff.
- you cannot magically send resources instantly to location. A villager must bring the resources to site.
Just my 5 cents.
4 Likes
Good thoughts
Can enemy or teammate build on where you’ve laid a foundation, though? If not, it doesn’t completely discount your point, but I think it does a tiny bit. Or at least brings it a small step back to my direction 
Hmm. For enemies you can, since they dont see your foundation at all. Not for allies I think
1 Like
Yes, they can. You can also sometimes find situations that you placed a foundation, but a building by an enemy since has been built there, in which case your foundation gets instantly canceled. (and all your villagers become idle once they’ve walked to that foundation)
First time I see a suggestion to make the game more difficult instead of easier. At least I recognize how original the post is. Good job.
3 Likes
Your argument is based off the most pointless, stifling rule in all of chess. That should be a cautionary tale, not an encouragement.
2 Likes
My argument isn’t based off of this chess rule; it was the only quick analogy I could think of at the time. Another one is in Minecraft where you get a preview of where your block will go, but once it’s placed, it’s gone from your inventory and you have to mine it back if you want it back. A cost to undo your action (time and effort). There are probably many other games and examples… and far better ones at that, probably in games you love
Minecraft is not a good example since this mechanic is not based on some attempt to raise stakes, but rather the simple fact that placement is instantaneous, as opposed to AOE where it is a gradual process.
You are correct that there are other good games that do this, but they are all senseless detractions from their games. Chess is a good example, scythe: digital edition is plagued by this as well.
1 Like
If I take wood out of my shed and put it in the middle of my backyard, then I can decide not to build anything with it and instead bring it back into my shed. 0 resources lost.
4 Likes
But if it’s not your backyard and you’re running a government and econony, nothing is free. An inherent assumed cost for labor and materials exist just to transport the materials to and fro. Plus, employee theft could occur as they take some materials for projects at home. We’ll say 10% loss
1 Like
The thing is, this wouldn’t even make the game harder in a “fun” way, just more annoying
Punishing mistakes is good, but if you haven’t started the building yet then I don’t see why the player should be punished, like, there’s nothing there, just a marker to where the building will be
Not to mention this would create a whole lot of issues with the fact that your fundations can be overriden by enemy buildings
1 Like
Feels like a game bug to me to not have any penalty, to be honest But it is what it is. I bet if Ensemble Studios had a penalty for removing foundations from the beginning of the franchise, nobody would question it and would not like the idea of free foundation removal services 
In Aoe1 all building foundations appeared with 1hp immediately when they were placed (like Farms do in Aoe2), and you lost all resources when deleting a foundation. This system was redesigned deliberately for Aoe2.
4 Likes
Given that everything else in the game is cancellable for free, why do you want just placing building foundations to have a cost.
I prefer Warcraft 3 system in regards to this. In that game:
- All resources are refunded if construction is not started.
- 75% of the resources are refunded, if construction is started but enemy has not attacked it yet.
- If the enemy has damaged the structure, then the percentage damage done by the enemy is not refunded. The minimum of 25% resources lost still applies.
- All structures are unarmoured during construction. This often means that units do about double damage to them.
So if you complete a building 80% and delete it, you get 75% resources back. If you build it 80% and the enemy damages it by 60% of max HP, you only get 40% resources back. The reason I prefer this method is that it punishes castles of Doubt to a lesser extent.
Ahaa, this is probably why I assumed AoE2 did the same and am sad it doesn’t do something similar regarding resource loss
The pendulum swung back too far. 100% resource loss was a little much… but 0%?? Why does it have to be all or nothing.
The 1 HP thing is fine to be gone. It was fine for me to exist, but I’m not a MP eSporter who exploited it
Because it is no longer in GUI/HUD fantasy planning land. You physically placed it on the map. It is there, in tangible form, as if it is a part of the game world. It is not the same as a cartoony icon in your HUD panel
An unbuilt foundation = just 4 sticks in the ground forming a square. Sounds closer to HUD fantasy land than a complete castle.
1 Like
It is not all or nothing. You lose exactly what you have invested in the building. As with any real construction project (contractual obligations aside). If all you have done is said “Let’s go build over there”, it costs nothing BECAUSE YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING. If you have used up 25% of the resources and built 25% of the building, you lose those 25% that you have invested. If you build 50%, you lose 50%. This is clearly the most sensible, reasonable way to address partially built buildings.
I can’t believe there is an actual discussion where people are advocating losing a portion of the building cost just for saying, “might be nice to have a castle over there”…
2 Likes
I agree with this completely. I think the confusion occurring here is that op thinks of building foundations in a very unique way that most AoE players do not. The fact is that foundations, can be walked over, built over and are invisible to the enemy until construction starts. All they are is a marker of where you intend to build the building. Imagine, how confusing it would be (visually) if you clicked to place a building and nothing appeared there for you or your allies to see until construction started, hence why a foundation appears. The foundation is a visual guide of intent and nothing more. You have allocated resources to the construction, but none have been consumed. It’s only an issue if you go looking for one.
It’s completely disingenuous to compare this mechanic to luring a boar or attacking a unit. Things which can’t be undone in the game are actions performed by the units/buildings themselves. If you haven’t noticed, the players actions are always entirely reversible if they are reversed before their actions result in a unit doing something or a building completing something. Therefore the current way foundations work is consistent with the rest of the game.
You compare this to chess as if they are comparable. Well there is a far better way to compare the two and it immediately shows why it’s ridiculous to use chess as an inspiration for mechanics. The mechanic you refer to in chess is that when you touch a piece you have to move the piece. You then compare this to placing a foundation. However the far better comparison is to the recent mechanic added in DE; shift clicking. If we wanted to make the game like chess and “punish” players for making “reckless” decisions we would force units to complete all of their shift clicked actions. “Oh you were scouting in a circle around your base but now you are getting drushed? Too bad, you showed us your intent to do two more laps around your base and now you have to go through with it”. As someone earlier mentioned, in chess it can be assumed each player has all of the knowledge required to make the best decision for the given board position, in an RTS with an ever changing “board” and very strict time constraints on decision making it is ridiculous to punish a players intentions. You should only punish actions, which is exactly how the game works. From the minute you place a foundation your villagers start walking over there, every second they walk and build for is a second they aren’t collecting resources. You mentioned factoring in labor costs, well guess what, there’s your labor costs.
2 Likes