There is no reason to debate. They are just points of view. Any opinion is welcome.
I have not suggested anything like that at any time, why do you assume that I am against balance?
This forum is only trying to represent the things that many players have wanted to be better. I only propose how it could be carried out and anyone can propose it.
About the little use of the natives, I am not the only forum that talks about this. In fact one of them was my inspiration to create this theme, collecting the things that can be better.
On cattle, since the mechanics that I propose would be historically feasible. Dairy farming has been going on for thousands of years and I would like a tribute to this. I think it would be enjoyable to watch.
Note first you say: âNo implementations from this discussion [âŠ]â Then you say: â[âŠ] it doesnt have to be everything at once.â
I dont know in what language you think you are writing here, but in English that means you want everything in this topic to be added, meaning you find OPâs ideas good, otherwise you wouldnt want that.
It doesnt have to be the exact words, that is not how language always works. Simply what you put means in context that you think his ideas are good. Same as saying slavery is not bad, and then when someone says âwhy do you think slavery is goodâ that you say quote were I say that.
Because refering to the above, you agree that the points made by OP in this topic should be added to the game, you then express your concern for the devs not adding a single thing from this thread and that you say you want atleast one and I quote: âit doesnât have to be everything at onceâ, meaning you expect the devs to add all the points from this topic.
Thus the question to you why would they add everything? As if the developers would do what only a few people want (like 13 people upvoted in this topic), so if other topics reach 13 upvotes, do you expect the developers to do all of that topic as well? I could have worded the original comment better though, I do agree with you there.
Natives are used a lot in treaty (ranked there isnt a lot of treaty, but there is a lot in casual) Spies are also treaty mainly, so I dont see why everything has to be OP, so people use it all the time.
Doesnt matter cattle historically had also other uses. All countries in Europe had banks, but only the Dutch get them, because its a game and thats called game design.
Historically huge parts of population died of diseases, lets give every unit a 20% chance of dying for historical authencity!
Take it easy my friend!. Please donât feel attacked. They are just suggestions. Remember that there can be creativity without the need to damage the balance.
I dont mind putting ideas here, but you cant say we shouldnt debate the ideas.
I assume you would like to see such things implemented as you put in your topic? So then there should be debate by people about what consequences it has for the game.
If you dont want them to be added and just a fun thought progress, then you should say that.
Your last two points I agree with, I dont play India a lot, but your point about their dragoon seems reasonable.
I agree that, surgeons and priests need something of a buff, like faster healing or (better) group healing, but I dont like taking other civs unqiue mechanics and implementing it for the others.
The spy making it ranged I wouldnt really mind it, but it would have to be a card, not an upgrade in my opinion. However the range multipliers should be lower then the melee, to balance them. I actually would like to see the anti native warrior multiplier return as that made the unit more viable on treaty.
They told me about the âExclusive Church Upgradesâ card. It has a different name for each situation, but it basically does the same thing. Give access to new technologies or you can purchase units.
I have been told that the Dutch one is fine.
I play mostly with Ottomans and itâs great too, but for other civilizations itâs not so great.
With Germans I donât know if it would be a drastic change to make the âwallenstein mercenariesâ upgrade that costs 3000 coins make infinite mercenaries a little cheaper (Maybe 5% less coins considering that there is another card that does just that called âmercenary loyaltyâ) It also grants a buff to doppelsoldners that gives them more hit points, and another that makes infantry faster, but a bit more expensive.
Are these improvements as is or do they suggest any changes?
Would making mercenaries cheaper break the balance?
This is another common letter for Europeans that I donât know what could be done to make it more useful. Gives you access to ronin and makes outlaws cost less population.
Is it fine like this or is it very little used?
What could be done if they consider it to be obsolete?
Not exactly, the hp/attack buffs were my suggestion but it currently only reduces outlaw pop and (I also suggested all outlaws to have less pop by default as well) and allows the recruitment of specific mercenaries in the Saloon; Ronin for Europeans, Iron Troop for China, Jat Lancer for India, Yojimbo for Japan (and in Stable for them as well for some reason).
Iâve thought about this for a while and an idea came up based on a âStarCraft-2â unit.
There is a unit in the game called âGhostâ that specializes in taking down elite units. It has a similar ability to the European sniper scout.
This unitâs ability requires energy that recharges over time.
How could we fill in something similar in the spy ?:
The âAgentsâ or âAsecinosâ card gives the spy a shooting ability that only recharges when you invest a certain amount of coins. Once you use it, it takes time to recharge and then when it recharges to activate it again, you must pay to use it again.
In conclusion we would be paying coins for each shot that he fires.
We could implement something similar for native trackers and ninjas.
That is a really good refinement of the idea. Iâve also played some Starcraft as a Terran and I always really liked the snipe ability of ghosts. Making you pay coin for the snipes may make it more fair for the opponent that had invested in buying that merc. However the cost of the snipe must still be significantly lower than the cost of hiring the mercs or you might as well just go and buy mercs of your own. Perhaps 30 coin or so per snipe.
Being a melee unit it becomes useless, even against what is supposed to be good as posed by the theme created by Peachrocks5. Anti-hero units are expensive too, but mercenaries tend to be much more expensive. I think the price of the shot should be relatively expensive, and only work against elite units (mercenaries and heroes). It must feel like youâre sacrificing economy for a tactical advantage.
Some of the things I wanted to improve, such as the formation where the guerrillas do not mix with musketeers, and the letters that were repeated have already been fixed some. I donât know if it was because you read this forum, but thank you.
They also removed the repeated cards with infinites, thanks devs! Hopefully we can see in the future some other changes to underused cards/units and European outlaws (natives rework is probably more long-term).
I really like your idea of surgeons generating XP. That sounds like a pretty good reason to build them and then you could pop down a field hospital for the extra heals. One thing is: I think they heal WAY too slow (the hospital AND the surgeon). If you contrast them with AOE2 monks I recall them healing quite a bit faster.
On the priest front of things⊠and⊠I may get some blowback for this but I think they should be able to convert units like in AOE2 & AOE1. Just my opinion⊠donât be too harsh now LOLOL.
And then as a USA player I think they should be able to heal minutemen that have received the marines upgrade. Kinda weird they canât.
No. He was talking about the priests in that possibility. They could have a lower creation limit than the current one, which is 30, maybe reduce it to 5 and that they generate experience when they are garrisoned in the church or in the mosque if they are Imanes.
(natives rework is probably more long-term).