What if Murder Holes didn't cost Stone?

Murder Holes is often a skipped technology since you could’ve used that 100 Stone for another TC, and Murder Holes doesn’t make a difference against most units that would actually go after a Castle (Trebuchets, Rams, Huskarls, etc). Additionally, if one is using towers, they can get around the minimum range by putting towers in range of one another, ensuring any infantry or villagers will get shot up either way.

It makes me wonder if the Stone cost for Murder Holes should be removed. Players still probably won’t research it often outside of team games, but that 100 Stone cost certainly doesn’t help make the tech any more appealing. I doubt the tech would suddenly become overpowered if it’s cost were changed to a different resource.


I think after infantry buff murder holes will be popular and 100 stone is too annoying. Must be 100 wood or something like that. Also investing 200 woods for uni is annoying to.

I think 200 food and 100 wood is a bit cheap and it would become an instant pickup once you have a castle like fortified walls, but I do agree 100 stone is bad. I think 300 food, 200 wood would strike a nice balance where you could get it, but you wouldn’t want to prioritise it. There is no reason to buff castle play after all.

I don’t think Tower/Castle against melee unit is something need to be buffed. Tower/ castle is strong enough.
It is not research that often but if you are against something like Goths you want to get this tech.
It is no need to make every tech cheaper. Some tech is cheap and some tech is bit burden to research it. It add more dimension to the game.

Not saying it should be cheaper. I’m just saying that putting a Stone cost on it doesn’t help.

Devs already changed a lot of technology costs, I liked stone costs on some techs.


It indeed looks weird that a tech that carves some holes in existing castle calls, costs some stone. Spend some stone to remove some stone :smile:

1 Like