But what if he is hitting your wood/gold with 5 militia 9:00 onwards and adding more? I don't think you can defend that without palisades. The other way is to spam houses around camps which is much costlier and harder for reasons of space.
idk, maybe players should start using their scout to see what their enemies are doing instead of pushing deer.But what if he is hitting your wood/gold with 5 militia 9:00 onwards and adding more? I don't think you can defend that without palisades. The other way is to spam houses around camps which is much costlier and harder for reasons of space.
Palisades are necessary to prevent extremely aggressive rushes, also in bad maps they are a must to control ur own map, the problem with stone walls is how strong they are vs feudal units, halving their HP and armor during feudal age should be enough to keep the balance with all different styles.
idk, maybe players should start using their scout to see what their enemies are doing instead of pushing deer.But what if he is hitting your wood/gold with 5 militia 9:00 onwards and adding more? I don't think you can defend that without palisades. The other way is to spam houses around camps which is much costlier and harder for reasons of space.
Regardless, this is still an extremely risky strategy from the drusher. Are they really going to commit to the dark age where they cant build any palisades? And this will be a successful strategy? Worst case scenario: The player is getting drushed by 5 militias and they arrive at 9 min (the vast majority of times 5 mil won't be there by 9:00: but for the sake of the argument let's say they do.)
He has to abandon his lumbercamp and take stragglers under his tc which cant be deleted. by ~10:00 he arrives in the feudal age and can probably secure a wood line complete with palisades if he wishes. Meanwhile the opponent is stuck in the dark for a long time if he's doing 5 or more militias. That gives plenty of time for the player to attack the drusher's unwalled base...
How is that NOT preferable to the current situation? The drusher invests in early barracks for 175 wood, 3 militias worth 180 food and 60 gold, and the other player can defend his eco completely with 20 wood or less. Seriously? My question is why have we tolerated this for 15+ years?
And if your argument is that "games will become too short if we move walls up an age!" How is this a bad thing? AoC games are frequently obscenely long, steps should be taken to shorten them
Speaking from no experience here. If I’m talking out of my a$$ I apologise. I’m happy to be schooled.
Does anybody drush on Arabia and then go into Feudal action for any length of time?
I ask because I was under the impression that people drushed on Arabia as part of a drush FC strategy.
The militia served as a distraction to keep the enemy busy whilst the drusher essentially skipped through feudal and got to Castle quicker where they can benefit from knights and siege.
If that’s the case I wouldn't feel too sorry for the drusher investing in early barracks and 3 militias if it means they can get to Castle quicker.
If however the drusher is not going to FC off the back of it, then, yes, I would feel sorry for them because that investment has basically achieved very little and has just been a waste of time and resources.
Drush is preferable strategy if you want to go into archers in Feudal too. not neceserary FC.
What amuses me though is how most changes are thought towards gameplay on Arabia not having in mind the game is much more complex than that. Nurfing Huns, Aztec and Mayans will hurt them on other maps where they are not preferable civs. Why no palisade in Dark age, can you tell me what a Hun player would do on BF, any chance to wall the choke point?
Drush is preferable strategy if you want to go into archers in Feudal too. not neceserary FC.
What amuses me though is how most changes are thought towards gameplay on Arabia not having in mind the game is much more complex than that. Nurfing Huns, Aztec and Mayans will hurt them on other maps where they are not preferable civs. Why no palisade in Dark age, can you tell me what a Hun player would do on BF, any chance to wall the choke point?
On bf it would get finally interesting. You've to keep in mind that other players can't wall either before feudal age. So people who want to wall have to use buildings. Would finally change the lame as boring meta of bf.
Its not lame and boring. Its a chill map and thats it. its whole idea is to have easily wallable choke points. And again with what building will a hun player wall? AoE is not simply Arabia dont forget that? If you find BF boring dont play it and thats all but You cant change the whole game to "suit"arabia more.
Its not lame and boring. Its a chill map and thats it. its whole idea is to have easily wallable choke points. And again with what building will a hun player wall? AoE is not simply Arabia dont forget that? If you find BF boring dont play it and thats all but You cant change the whole game to "suit"arabia more.
Sometimes bf is really open tho can happen. You've just to change your strategy for such a map. If its really a closed version of bf you can build houses and as huns you've to agressive. I think as huns on bf you should play agressive anyway, because all their advantages are mainly in early game compared to the other civs.
how aggresive can you go when the opponent have easy time walling whle you dont. You think you can succeed to drush, what about him. Im dont want to argue with yuo over a simple example but the fact is that the game is much more than arabia while most changes are thought towards it. The balance of the game is not broken it all depends on the setting you play than the top choices vary.
Usually civs like Koreans, Saracens and Franks are described as bad for Arabia, OK. But Saracens are good wter civ, pretty decent Arean and BF civ. Koreans are top tyer BF civ while Franks are good DM civ. AoE is all of these an much more its not just Arabia gameplay. If you want changes and new stuff try AoAK.
I like that!It would make drush way strongerI do too. but the experts dont :crazy:well i guess then uve actually to remove palisades from dark age. i actually like that even more.
still sounds like a better game than what we have nowYou are right in that normally drushes dont hit with 5 militia at 9:00, it hits often upto a minute later than that. But that is because when palisades are possible, there may be no point to rushing so fast with militia rather than focusing more on eco with earlier farms for instance. Not because they can't hit at 9 min. Anyway, what I feel is that people with start hitting with miltia very early - like 8:30 and keep adding miltia with celts for example. The drusher won't wall up, he can choose to add more miltia if he sees that he can score good damage, or he can opt for a faster feudal around 12:30 with just 3-4 miltia (still doing some damage) and then dropping ranges for skirms vs archers.
I don't feel that the overall effect of removing palisades from dark is healthy.
if only there is a tournament with stonewalls starting from castle age 8-)
i would donate 100 dollars
if only there is a tournament with stonewalls starting from castle age 8-)
i would donate 100 dollars
http://www.aoczone.net/viewtopic.php?f= ... 30#p501830
shall i make it $300 then?