Shouldnt Buying/Selling on Market be a Castle Age onwards thing?

[goyalmanik22]

I think this would appropriately punish unbalanced eco management for feudal at least, and timing advantages wouldn't be so prevalent. mx player

 

[The Bloodless]

It can end games quickly with a very fast castle age push (Hoang) or allow a comeback if you're a minute slower to castle (you can buy a tower, for instance). I think if we remove the market use from feudal a lot more games will end fast, usually with the stronger civ winning in early castle. I would much rather keep the market.

I'm picturing scenarios like where one player puts 5 archers on your wood unopposed (both main armies on opposite side of map) and suddenly you can't get the wood to make farms / market won't help and you can't make it to castle age. Gg

 

[Hunyadi_]

Make it more expensive in feudal age.

 

[SC2noHope]

Daut lives matter
dont nerf market please

 

[Lokalo]

This topic appear not the first time and I personally don't like market use/abuse in feudal much, however in long feudal games no market would be terrible.

I think at least for start and it might be enough to keep everything as it is, EXCEPT make selling stone being able from castle age. That alone would give a minute or two to a player with better macro. At same time maybe would increase people placing gates and stone walls as currently 99% of the games people either sell stone or build tower(which usually is looked like big no no) or build tcs, I mean building stone gate currently is kind of prohibited until late castle age or imp. People better build 2 palisade gates instead of stone gate just to be able to sell or build tc, unless you are Sicillians then you can build donjon and still have for a tc.

I think it wouldn't affect that much, but might make players think if they do need market. As now many people for example going CA or EW selling stone without even thinking. So yeah, making feudal a minute or two longer and making better macro rewarded a bit more might be a good thing. Also building a defensive tower wouldn't affect your castle age timing, just the abbility to place new tcs, which I think might be a good thing too.

 

[lecracheursagacite]

Feudal Age represents the first time your civilization is in a real society rather than a nomadic state so to not have a functional place of exchange then is absurd. If it's such a problem for certain civs to be able to sell or buy resources in the Feudal Age maybe the problem is with those civs rather than the market itself.

 

[bhuttehai]

I think they could just do something like make feudal age resource trading highly less efficient, then make it return to normal 70/130 on castle age, something like automatic Guilds-like effect. For example during feudal you could buy 100f with 150+g instead of 130g, or gain 40-50g by selling 100w/f instead of 70g.

hellodear.in

teatv download

 

[kalpit00]

Feudal Age represents the first time your civilization is in a real society rather than a nomadic state so to not have a functional place of exchange then is absurd. If it's such a problem for certain civs to be able to sell or buy resources in the Feudal Age maybe the problem is with those civs rather than the market itself.

functional place of exchange, this isnt RuneScape get outta here Kappa

 

[lecracheursagacite]

functional place of exchange, this isnt RuneScape get outta here Kappa

idk to me aoe2 is pretty uninteresting without the story aspect

anyways it is a video game in a medieval setting so it is at least part runescape

 

[Authentic]

This will be my first answer to this topic here.

I play this game been like 14 years, and like 8 competing on the big events, this is not a frustration because i “lost some games”, like you said. I say that because sometimes I win games that I shouldnt and I lose games that I shouldnt after some better or worse start on the early feudal. You just know something is broken after you get to see it.

Also, what I am saying is not to remove market trading, just puting it to castle age instead of feudal age. This is the same when team games were played before, everyone was just slinging because there was no really counter for that. What was made? Changing coinage from feudal to castle (and in some tournaments you would get coinage on imp only). Balance changes are part of the game and forums are made to discuss things, my main point here.

Your answer is very disrespectful, you should respect the opinion from someone that knows way more than you and is way better than you. There are good ways to answer (like every post before yours is).

I agree. As someone who has played previous versions of this game, they made many changes to the balance, but not the market. In earlier forms of aoc, the market abuse was generally not as strong, ie fuedal age buildings, towers, and walls were stronger and maps were different too. In my view it should be punished for neglecting your economy and abusing the market as the game originally was not designed for this. The market price should be adjusted overall nerfing it totally in fuedal.

 

[RainbowDemon]

Rereading this thread after the recent bump, I've come to the conclusion that most "anti market" arguments are just people mad that they don't instawin when towering/camping enemy resources or because their opponents get fast castle times, with little or no mention of the downsides.
In my opinion the market is not broken and does exactly what it's supposed to.