Mule cart should be optional

Armenians and Georgians need the option to build mining camps and lumber camps. Mule carts are only 300 HP and also the fact that they are mobile means you cannot small wall your gold or wood, unless you do a bigger wall and also wall in the mule cart, which completely defeats the point of it being mobile.

It’s still useful if you’re out on the map and want to take deer or some other resource with forward villagers but in its current state, it needs work to say the least. I also find that it doesn’t move into a logical position and you still have to babysit them on woodlines and there’s a lot of villagers getting stuck and bumping, although they’re supposedly fixing that in the patch.

2 Likes

That’s nonsense. This is how they have been designed. If you don’t like using them, use other civs.

17 Likes

What is next, Chinese having an option to start with 3 villagers and normal resources?

1 Like

Next knights should be optional for indian civis.

Stable for American civs too when we are at it.

2 Likes

You’re all missing the point completely and then giving ridiculous strawman examples which are nothing like my example.

3 Likes

A civ bonus is supposed to be exactly that; a bonus. Not a bonus with negatives attached, i.e. 300 HP vs 800 - 1000 HP for lumber / mining camp. And the 20 food cost per mule cart. Could at least reduce the wood cost to offset the food cost. Food is such a valuable resource in dark age, it’s a terrible civ design to have a drop off point which requires food to build it. Ruins build orders.

Edit: - New patch will reduce wood cost of mule carts to 80, so at least the total resources will be the same.

Starting with 3 villagers doesn’t?

Civilisations are supposed to be different and their features are supposed to have drawbacks.
A lot of strong bonuses are combines with some strong disadvantages like missing Blacksmith technologies.
Here the advantage of having Mule Carts is combines with the disadvantage of not having a lumber and mining camp.

3 Likes

No, it doesn’t. Because Chinese and Mayans have been in the game since the beginning in 1999, so you’d have to have been living under a rock to not know they don’t have the typical 3 villager start.

Missing the last armour upgrade is nothing like having a bonus with a disadvantage in dark age. Dark age is the most fragile part of the game and therefore sets the momentum for the rest of the game. If the game survives until imperial, the differences there are only noticeable if the game drags on. E.g. if you hit imperial first and get arbalest and bracer while your opponent is going all in castle age. Missing the last archer armour is inconsequential, since a lot of arbalest players forget to get the armour anyway, even if their civ has it. It only become an issue if it gets to late game when gold has run out. Whereas losing villagers late dark age / early Feudal because you can’t wall to a mule cart can snowball into GG.

I’ll be a bit contrary to the other replies here, but I agree with OP. This is one of the things I like about the Folwark bonus: you can completely ignore it and play a normal game without ever using it. Or you could make a specific plan to play around it, and defend your Folwark positions to keep the Farms safe.

I think having some reason to choose between the standard drop site and the Mule Cart (cost, mobility, transport ship ability, etc), so players have to make a decision about what to do, would make the bonus far more interesting. Kinda like how the Norse have to manage normal Villagers vs Dwarves in AoM.

3 Likes

I also agree. The best bonuses in the game give you more flexibility, not less. The Khmer bonus is really strong because you can either ignore it and play normally or use it for insanely fast age ups and rushes. I feel that a civ having less options than the standard civ just typically makes it much worse; there are exceptions, of course (notably the Meso civs). Even the Hindustanis and Gurjaras, while lacking Knights, have a large number of options that allow for a highly flexible playstyle. The Armenians and Georgians have nothing like that, and they feel awkward as a result.

5 Likes

You can have an option to change its stance from mobile to immobile for some extra HP, but the change can’t be reverted.

1 Like

Just give it more HP (like 500) and it’s fine.

Why does bigger wall defeats mobility? Why do you even move when you have walled in?

I don’t like walling with mule carts either, but I think it’s manageable. Maybe mining camps can be given to Caucasian civs, for two reasons (but not lumber camps):

  • Mines are way harder to small wall, especially with 8+ miners
  • The lack of two camp buildings means Caucasian civs cannot do lumber camp + mining camp as prerequisites if they want to play an archer build order. Barracks is the only choice. It’s doable but kills a bit of flexibility.

The biggest issue with mule carts tho, is that when you drag select eco units they are also included, making it annoying to evacuate vils. Like why would they need to occupy a valuable garrison space?