What if the villager needs only 25 food and all the military units need 50 or above food even archers and cavalry archers because all military need to eat food to survive. And also Halberdiers and Skirmishers 50 to 60 food. And hussars 120 food, knights and conquists also 120 food and 75 gold.
I think this is very relatable to IRL.
Could please explain more in details why such change ?
Like in real life, how is it possible that an army man requires less food than a farmer. Every time the warriors are more hungry than the peasants. And also we can make more farmers and reduce pressure on farmer economy.
Yeah but it totally breaks the balance of the game )
How could anyone consider those changes as small changes?
May be ahead are many more great changes, this might be just an one step.
I want to make this less rush on economy game. I had a post already which suits my comments.
This game has been out since 1999 and has many fans that like the game the way it is.
Why would you want to fundamentally change the game after almost 25 years?
It would make the game play a lot worse and completely utterly destroy all balance.
It may still worshipped for 100 more years, why shouldn’t we see that we had more 3 versions already
And aoe2 alone had more than 10s of updates. This would be a better sign for the fifth version.
I think your main argument is not solid. That takes away any desire of discuss your idea.
I’ll take it seriously anyway.
I think range units, like archers and CA costing no food it is something that could be discussed. What if a little food cost would be applied to those units?
In terms of gameplay and meta.
I will accept archers and cavalry archers need a huge difference in food, if you want to make such a difference at least a 50 food of difference and why don’t we go cavalry archers little high on cost like 70 food not 120 food like hussars, and make archers low like 30 to 40 food and same wood and gold would do.
Only militia and knight might need to change , anything else is fine.
Villager cost 50 food is a standard setting since AOE1, we don’t need to change it .
Militia shouldn’t cost more than halberdiers in food due to their similarity.
Knights use better horses than hussar so they shouldn’t cost less food.
Why shouldn’t they all, not need to cost more food? or need to cost less food? Is there a must that they should eat less than a villager who takes 50 food?
you want to completely change the balance of the game for what?
historicity? in a game where the misspelled maya fight against the vikings on socotra or arabia. With both of them using trebuchets…
The reality of course, and to be genuine we live in a universe of multiple dualities and not just for reality of history but for the truth of our lives and truth for the kids to know. Not for the greed.
In reality people consume food several times a day not just once they are born.
If you really want to make the game more realistic, then, units shoudn’t cost food. They should cost mainly gold and maybe wood to train, but should consume an X amount of food per minute. This way, you have to maintain a constan food income in order to supply yout people. If you run out of food well… units could start losing HP, or abandon your kingdom (become gaia unit), or whatever.
Of course, mounted units should consume more food per minute, and elephants even more.
But the supply 100 kg wheat or paddy is enough for one year. And that is what I thought about micro Life in Game.
And yeah I think after 20 mins in game approx 100 years a man should die and new villagers should be created so that we won’t be using a same villager for 1000 years in 2 hours game. And even this must settle down the issue of excess food collected by villagers if in excess count of villagers. So the gamer thinks to creating excess villagers. Cease creating excess villagers(32).
have you tried stronghold?