I understand your point. I can increase the cost to 100 wood. But this will cause two major problems -
It will impede the initial investment by a lot of resources. Current bonus gives absolutely no save until castle age, that’s when you need the most reseeding.
Giving negative bonuses to compensate is a weird concept and should be avoided as much as possible. It is only done as some starting resource less for some civs. Not a permanent effect.
There are civs like Teutons that get cheaper farm and over the 50+ farms as you stated they save 1000 wood as well. But the catch is they start saving from game start. There isn’t a farm tech missing not even hand cart so they gather with full efficiency. Also there are some civs who get wood saving or wood gathering bonus that benefits them from the start of the game.
Don’t you see the cross mark on third box of light Cavalry?
Any other ideas how I can use the harbor graphics in a more balanced manner for the civ?
That’s your personal opinion. I think it is a fun mechanism, I will even like to see some melee dodges mechanisms in future. Anyways I wanted to make a civ with Unupgraded Elephant Archer and Unupgraded Armoured Elephant but Upgraded Battle Elephants but having a UT that makes them usable with a unique bonus. Any other ideas to make them viable?
that’s the point. rn there is no downside to immediately start farming in dark age
I agree, which is why I think this is a bad bonus
yeah, but teutons only get scouts and no husbandry
I said fully upgraded Light Cav, you are talking about hussar. Hussar is a relatively minor upgrade, only gives 15 extra HP (less than bloodlines), no extra armor and a tiny increase in attack speed.
Missing any of bloodlines and final armor is way more important. I’d even take husbandry or blast furnace over hussar in most situations
don’t. leave it unique to malay
it is. but it is also the most hated mechanic in the game atm (flemish revolution is getting ignored since the price increase)
why do you want to have viable unupgraded units? you will probably need a unique tech that has a similar effect to the elite upgrade or a big price discount (similar to kamandaran xbows)
Your above post was just don’t use that, don’t use that either.
I asked any other suggestions what I can use instead. In response you said no… just scrap everything.
two things:
a) i think we have more civs than is good for the game, so any new civs need to be exceptionally good
b) you say you want to do something, but give no reason why. harbours have an identity by being unique to malay. you say you want to give them to this new civ, but give no reason why. so what I see is a big negative in making the building less unique, without any reason given to justify this. similar with unupgraded elephant archers. why not just give them the upgrade?
The reason is extremely simple. I made the Indian harbour graphics. It took some hardwork. I want to get it used in some manner. I am fine with some other functionality if needed.
To make a different combo of upgrades. We have a civ with EAs only (Gurjaras) we have civs with BEs only (SEA Civs), we have a civ with Elite EA but not Elite BE (Dravidians), we have a civ with both Elite EA and Elite BE (Bengalis). We have civs with Elite AEs. I want to make what is missing, a civ with Elite BE but no Elite EA and AE.
Its funny when someone posts a civilization idea very few come to give feedback on improvement but when its done in a none related topic all the balance experts come to comment.
The Ayyubids could be, Oman and Muscat I don’t know, it doesn’t say much about them prior to the Omani Empire of the 18th century (that’s why I say they fit better for AoE 3)…in the Middle Ages it says that after the fall of the Umayyads in 750 they belonged to the Abbasids and Seljuks, then remained a weak sultanate occupied by the Portuguese in 1507 until 1696 when they began their imperial expansion…
For East Asia the ones with the highest priority for me are Jurchens, Khitans, and Tanguts. Tibetans are highly unlikely to be introduced. The devs considered to add them before but scrapped the idea at the last moment likely due to political reasons.
And for SE Asia the ones with the highest priority are Siamese (covering both Thais and Laotians), Chams, and Mons.
Emperor of East - Jurchen + Qiang. New campaign for old civ - Chinese. Qiang is the ban evasion name of Tibetans that will also represent Tanguts. I won’t mind a separate Tanguts either.
Invaders of India - Hophlites (Also known as White Huns or Huna) + Pashtuns (Mostly known as Afghans or Pathans). A bit offensive name. Sorry. I just wanted to share a name that has XOX pattern.
Sultans of Steppe - Khitans + Kipchaks. New campaign for old civ - Turks. Can have different steppe civ as well.
Khans of Khaganate - Avars + Gokturks. Turks campaign can be added here too. And this one is very lame choice of a DLC name.
Monarchs of Mountains - Khazars + Azeris. Second Caucasian DLC.
Into Indochina - Siamese + Cham. New campaign for old civ - Japanese. Second South East Asian DLC.
I agree with most of your suggestions except adding Japanese campaigns in a SE Asian DLC. Medieval Japan had nothing to do with SE Asia. Japanese campaigns should be introduced in an East Asian DLC.
Here’re my proposals for potential East Asian and SE Asian DLCs:
Lords of the Eastern Steppe featuring Jurchens and Khitans. Korean or Chinese campaigns could be introduced with this DLC.
Periphery of the Sinosphere featuring Nanzhao / Dians and Tanguts. Japanese campaigns could be introduced with this DLC.
Jewels of the Mekong featuring Chams, Siamese, and Mons.
And the last one would be Tales of the Spice Kingdoms featuring Javanese, Visayans, and a reworked Malay. This one is optional and only needs to be introduced if we have enough space.
They can be renamed. They are called kipchak horseman in Kotyan Khan campaign hint section. We can rename them Cuman Horseman.
I know. But not putting a Chinese campaign into a Chinese DLC will be pretty ironic.
Yeah. I checked. I thought “Sultans” is a Turkic term. But it is actually an Arabic term. Maybe a Saracens split into Kurds + Bedouins then. But I don’t think they can fit into “Steppe” theme.
Why would that be ironic though? I don’t see where the irony is. Putting Chinese and Japanese campaigns in an East Asian DLC are quite suitable IMHO, whereas putting them in a SE Asian DLC would be quite out of place.
I think the Khitans should preferably be introduced in a new East Asian themed DLC along with the Jurchens, whereas the Kipchaks are already covered by the Cumans.