I think that the improvement of ‘iron horse’ and the like should not only improve the delivery speed, but also the quantity. I think this improvement pales as the game gets macroeconomic. It is not proporotic to late game conditions.
Should the ‘iron horse’ upgrade and the like grant more resources than the ‘diligence’ upgrade? (Personally I think it could be a much higher amount, but significantly increasing the price of the technology).
Yes.
No.
0voters
Note:If you see some responses not related to the topic, it is because there were 2 surveys, but I eliminated one of them and decided to only focus on a single topic.
i mean russian cavalry like most cavalry in europe had guns, esp pistols. but it is one of those things the game in general doesn’t depict well, dragoons for example should be far more melee oriented than they are depicted.
As far as I have read, most cav (Hussars/Cossackas and others) had side arms at least…
Horse archers should be part of “archaic” units, (not that Im saying that archaic should be weak perse)
Jonasnee8581Wolfstack The Ottomans need an infinite native ally card for the treaty. What could be the best option within the minor factions that currently exist?
It is to replace the 15 barbarian corsairs. The Ottomans do not have gunpowder cavalry, so I would like it to be this type of unit. Or also a skirmisher or shock infantry type unit.
Yes. More or less for this reason I asked this question. Both civilizations have all their units with firearms except the cavalry and the halberds. The archer horsemen are slightly out of context.
Sudanese maybe? berbers? sunni? idk i think those could all work, like you need a group they had contact with to add them for the ottomans.
i think Sudanese Dervish probably make the most sense gameplay wise as it gives you a melee infantry unit, but it is a pretty weird one. the berber camel rider makes more sense historically and it gives you a good anti cavalry unit which the ottomans have big issues with.
i dont think we can get a gunpowder cav unit because jesuits wouldn’t make a ton of sense for the ottomans, and we cant go too far away for units either.
Well, that actually means more resources. So yeah, Iron Horse gives more resources than diligence.
I don’t see why you need more, a player controlling all TPs would dominate the entire match. I mean the objective of TPs is only to be a secondary source not a main one.
It makes sense what you say, but I am also a treaty player and a supply of wood or any more extensive resource at the end of the game would be nice. In the early game its impact is remarkable, in the late game its effects are practically irrelevant.
This is a suggestion a bit apart from the forum topic: It would be better not to increase the speed of a commercial route traveled by camels to match the speed of a railroad; It would make more sense to increase the amount of resources that it delivers and thus they will not look like camels in a marathon.
I think that trains and the like should have a higher speed, but it makes sense that they also increase the amount of resources they can bring, I propose that the improvement provides 15% more speed and resources.
I totally agree, but I don’t want it to happen like the camels on the African maps.
increasing the speed is exactly the same as delivering more resources tho. same end result of more resources per second. more res per pass is just an added layer of unnecessary
It would be nice if they’d do this instead of increasing speed on African maps. It would look a lot nicer than the camels on meth that we currently have.
I’ve seen that on historical maps locomotive technology makes shipments arrive faster. Maybe this could make the ‘iron horse’ upgrade make shipments arrive a bit faster, as long as you have a route TP. If the effect is stackable, maybe each TP should increase the delivery speed by xx%.
In the case of camels, they do not increase in speed with each upgrade, they only increase the amount of resources they give.
