They would, specially in the Imperial Age.
Tatars and Huns go for Knights in Castle too.
so your source is 5 games.
the first game, he lost even.
three of the maps are hybrid land and water maps. which is an entirely different meta.
two of them has smaller resource nodes, which again, different meta.
and ironically the same last two were mongols mirrors, which of course are going to be full of mind games.
1 Like
u should make your own thread to gather the attention of more people to support your point, it is off topic to put it in here
2 Likes
which one is more original/interesting/not too game breaking?
making a civ with no stone wall or keep so castles are the main defense, if they turtle
Start with enough 500 extra stone (im pretty sure once you reach castle age that’s enough to immediately place one down, if not the number needs to be adjusted)
Castles have 20% of their stone cost replaced with wood
or
Stone mining upgrades free
1 Like
i like the second one but i want to know how overpowered it might be
20% = 130?
so you only need 520 stone
also 20% more castles assuming unlimited wood
franks outright save 25% on all castles. no conversion needed.
1 Like
so what about the other two options?
unless the bonus is discount is way than the Frank’s discount (plus its original)
maybe if it was 35%
I would also like a civilization that had as a bonus, the possibility of building a monastery in the feudal age, and monks. I would think about giving this bonus to the mississippians. And as an exclusive unit, a warrior priest who, instead of conversing, attacks (melee attack). And also had the possibility to heal units. That way he could heal friendly units and attack enemy units. That would be a concept that I would give Mississippians for Age of empires 2.
starting with 500 extra stone sounds incredibly broken. being able to automatically drop a castle the moment you hit castle age would just be absurd.
not to mention the potential for market abuse with it.
free stone mining upgrades doesn’t sound that bad.
1 Like
i was making an Iroquois tech tree, this is for that, i gave the iroquis basically warrior priests anyway 11
ill only post it if i get permission from @Szaladon since they are already doing similar stuff
1 Like
I would love to see the concept of your iroquois warrior priest. He would then have these same characteristics. Heal and attack?
1 Like
yes the Iroquois warrior priest will have the about same characteristics, however im thinking of calling it a warcheif
a monastery in feudal age might be too easy to get the relics
1 Like
what if they receive that upon advancing, or their first castle only casts 150 stone?
the third option was if the other two were too unreasonable as it was based off of the Burmese bonus of free lumber camp upgrades, but since the conversion one has a chance i think ill stick with that
1 Like
either is still absurd.
and no issue with free stone mining upgrades.
1 Like
I could call it a shaman. On the possibility of creating monks and building monasteries, and the advantage of this in the search for relics, I thought of the possibilities of balance: 1) That he can build only a monastery in the feudal age (similar to the city center). 2) That the monks have a slow speed (slower than the standard). 3) And as a form of correction, of this “brake and counterweight”, that civilization has as a bonus, an increase in the speed of the advancing ages (1st of feudal age to the age of castles - reaching common speed, and 2nd of age of castles to imperial age - reaching a speed slightly higher than that of an ordinary monk). There are already some buildings in the game that are available prematurely for civilization, such as a market (in the dark ages) and a siege workshop (in the feudal age). I thought of a civilization that had this same type of bonus for building monasteries, but as you said it would also need a form of restraint and counterweight. I really would like this unique unit outside the Mississippians, but whoever it is, this type of unit present in the game would already be very cool (Father Gerreiro - Xama). As well as the bonus of building monastery in the Feudal age. Both the Mississippians and the Iroquois have a history that involves religion, and a single unit with these characteristics would be ideal for their representation (warrior priest - shaman).
1 Like
my concept the Warcheif/Warrior Priest/Shaman is actually an upgrade of the monk
not a mobile monastery or vil
however you can make your ow civ concept and add them in
1 Like
but the conversion (raised the bar to 40% of the stone cost) isn’t too absurd, right? (the stone mining upgrades free was if any was too overpowered)
i might include both though
Got it. Your concept of warrior priest / war chief / shaman. it will be an exclusive Iroquois update for the common monk. This means that it must maintain the properties of converting and healing, and not of healing and attack (instead of converting). I loved your concept of this Iroquois unit. You are thinking of using this concept for Iroquois (conversion update - conversion and healing). A Mississippian unit could have these properties - attack and healing (without converting power).
1 Like