New Expansion (Site Added 19 Sep)

[Aron-creazy]

MUst add the portuguese Civi, they can have the condottiere and the equal architecture of Italians, Just for the italians dont be the uniques with this supernice architecture and the condottiere. Only have to make de UU to them and already!] [

[danielpereira]

MUst add the portuguese Civi, they can have the condottiere

LOLWUT ?

[hiuhugh]

I have some ideas on the New Expansion.
1. Guard Tower and Keep are under-used. I think it is mainly because of scarcity of stone. Maybe there should be a technology that can reduce the stone usage by 50% or even more. If I have 125 stone, I would rather build a TC for protection and economic expansion. But if the price of guard tower for stone is reduced, I can build only a mining camp and a tower and still provide enough protection.

The technology should only be able to reach at castle age to prevent overpower feudal tower rush.
2. I think garrisoning 5 units is not enough for protection. There should be a technology to increase the garrisoning number by +5. Teutons, on the other hand, should have extra garrisoning number other than the research.

3. I think Champion is one of the best units that is underused. It is mainly because civilizations have better alternatives than Champion. Say Mongols have Hussars. I think they should be strength, not only for the purpose of increasing their use, but also it be fairer to the infantry-based civilizations like vikings which are extremely weak in imperial age. My suggestion is increase Champion's HP by 10 or increase its pierce armour by 1.

4. I personally like Byzantines a lot but I think the cost reduction in trash units make it too strong. Maybe a cost reduction of 20% instead of 25% will be better.

5. Tarkan of Huns is actually a good unit. The only problem is the non-elite version is too weak. It is only 7 attack! If it costs 60 food and 60 gold, it deserves to be much better! I know it has bonus on building and it is cheaper than Knights so Tarkan should never be as strong as knights. But I think the minimum is the non-elite version should be stronger than light caveriler and can be a substitute of knights. After all, it is not wise to sacrifice expensive Tarkan for cheap buildings in castle age. So why not make Tarkan an alternatives for Huns? It is cheaper but weaker version of knights, but the trade-off is it is good at destroying buildings.

I suggest its base attack goes from 7=>8 or even 7=>9.

6. I think buildings being built should have a much weaker defense. I realize that walling is too easy and cost-effective to stop the opponents with great armies.

7. Camels should have a base attack from 5=>6. They are simply too weak compared to their price.

8. I think the Japanese gather point reduction cost can be something around 60~70% to make Japanese playable in 1v1 dark age without water.

9. There should be some economic bonus for Franks in Dark Age. Franks is really a weird civilization. It has the best knight-line but it is not the best for booming knights. Persians, Huns, Vikings or even Teutons can boom with Knights much better than Franks. Who would bother with Franks?

Also, I am not sure but I think Franks should have better cavalry archers. It allows Franks to have more alternatives to play other than knights + castle + axe man. Better cavalry archers for franks can allow franks to disturb its enemies's economy and support its knights. Franks is simply boring to play.
10. Vikings should have the last upgrade of cavalry armor. It is simply too weak in imperial age.

[hiuhugh]

I have some ideas on the New Expansion.
1. Guard Tower and Keep are under-used. I think it is mainly because of scarcity of stone. Maybe there should be a technology that can reduce the stone usage by 50% or even more. If I have 125 stone, I would rather build a TC for protection and economic expansion. But if the price of guard tower for stone is reduced, I can build only a mining camp and a tower and still provide enough protection.

The technology should only be able to reach at castle age to prevent overpower feudal tower rush.
2. I think garrisoning 5 units is not enough for protection. There should be a technology to increase the garrisoning number by +5. Teutons, on the other hand, should have extra garrisoning number other than the research.

3. I think Champion is one of the best units that is underused. It is mainly because civilizations have better alternatives than Champion. Say Mongols have Hussars. I think they should be strength, not only for the purpose of increasing their use, but also it be fairer to the infantry-based civilizations like vikings which are extremely weak in imperial age. My suggestion is increase Champion's HP by 10 or increase its pierce armour by 1.

4. I personally like Byzantines a lot but I think the cost reduction in trash units make it too strong. Maybe a cost reduction of 20% instead of 25% will be better.

5. Tarkan of Huns is actually a good unit. The only problem is the non-elite version is too weak. It is only 7 attack! If it costs 60 food and 60 gold, it deserves to be much better! I know it has bonus on building and it is cheaper than Knights so Tarkan should never be as strong as knights. But I think the minimum is the non-elite version should be stronger than light caveriler and can be a substitute of knights. After all, it is not wise to sacrifice expensive Tarkan for cheap buildings in castle age. So why not make Tarkan an alternatives for Huns? It is cheaper but weaker version of knights, but the trade-off is it is good at destroying buildings.

I suggest its base attack goes from 7=>8 or even 7=>9.

6. I think buildings being built should have a much weaker defense. I realize that walling is too easy and cost-effective to stop the opponents with great armies.

7. Camels should have a base attack from 5=>6. They are simply too weak compared to their price.

8. I think the Japanese gather point reduction cost can be something around 60~70% to make Japanese playable in 1v1 dark age without water.

9. There should be some economic bonus for Franks in Dark Age. Franks is really a weird civilization. It has the best knight-line but it is not the best for booming knights. Persians, Huns, Vikings or even Teutons can boom with Knights much better than Franks. Who would bother with Franks?

Also, I am not sure but I think Franks should have better cavalry archers. It allows Franks to have more alternatives to play other than knights + castle + axe man. Better cavalry archers for franks can allow franks to disturb its enemies's economy and support its knights. Franks is simply boring to play.
10. Vikings should have the last upgrade of cavalry armor. It is simply too weak in imperial age.

[the_Dragon]

reply to h guy
Please note that I actually agree on some points despite any sarcasm be it intentional or not, I agree most with point 3 which says that champions need a boost.
1. They're not used because they are an immobile structure that is defensive in nature. That said, if there was a real benefit in building them for defenses, not just making them a dime a dozen, perhaps they would see more use.
2. making them garrison 10 units doesn't really help. Just because they lack much use in offensive play doesn't change the fact towers ARE a powerful building: a Gaurd tower with 8 attack and firing 4 arrows is pretty powerful. But all it can do is defend, while a town center can boost your economy and defend (if you really care about towers being boosted, the issue is that town centers are powerful enough to kill raiders. Thus, tc's wowuld need to be weakened)
The key to making towers popular would in my opinion to make them comparably more powerful than a Town Center, and be a needed building to stop raids on your town.
3. Champions could be underused.. but part of it is that people will make such powerful cavalry! Great halb killers, but skirmishers and archers can easily fill that role too. The other reason I can identify is that champions sadly won't last many battles.
4. idk
5. I didn't realize tarkans were a front line unit.
6. they already do, but I agree it's too little
7, idk, I like that a men at arms can hurt a stupid camel
8. How is this inferior in the Dark Age to Civilizations like the Franks or the Spanish?
9. The option to use cavalry archers exist for all but two civilizations, and this is not an issue with the Franks but rather with the game dynamics as they stand now.

[Dalv]

Could a no attack mode until a certain time (like Treaty mode in AOE3) be somehow coded?
I know many people that play AOE2 with no attack rule until they evolve and keep away from voobly or GR because other players break the rule. I think they would surely appreciate such option.

[the_Dragon]

Doesn't Wonder Race do exactly that?
In any case I hate Wonder Race and treaty games

[F_aLc_enSchrei]

he wants a set peacetime until fe min 30, not a full eco mode ~~

[danielpereira]

Could a no attack mode until a certain time (like Treaty mode in AOE3) be somehow coded?
I know many people that play AOE2 with no attack rule until they evolve and keep away from voobly or GR because other players break the rule. I think they would surely appreciate such option.

I think I remember suggesting that to cys, but he said it is hard to code....

[TurboB1337]

So the carto is free. I think its better when the market build, then the carto is automatically researched, like in the earlier versions when you advanced to feudal age you get the carto automatically.