Jump to content
Age of Civilizations

Eastert

Baron
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Eastert got a reaction from Kerems2434 in Age of Civilizations 2 - World Conqueror 4 Map (7920 Provinces) - HUGE MAP -   
    i dont think it will be better than original..ūüėē
  2. Like
    Eastert reacted to SnowHalation1 in Button to assimilate all states   
    We need this.
  3. Like
    Eastert reacted to ITurkishmapping in Button to assimilate all states   
    true
  4. Like
    Eastert reacted to Boblik in Button to assimilate all states   
    this has probably been said before but we NEED a button that can assimilate all states that can be assimilated. Because having to press the button who knows how many times nearly 30 turns gets annoying, really annoying. It's especially annoying when you annex a large country like Russia or China.
     

  5. Like
    Eastert reacted to ShouldIStayOrShouldIGo in Button to assimilate all states   
    Same for army conscription and buildings. It’s just so annoying to build and upgrade (3-5 times each building) building in every province, something like brush tool will be nice. When you have more than 10 provinces the building/investing/army making process becomes unbearable and prevents you from getting enjoyed
  6. Like
    Eastert got a reaction from TheZueiro465 in Ressources   
    Yea, great. I'd add that country could not build oil stations wherever it wants. There are certain places on the map where oil or even iron can be produced. And therefore there must be a competition for these provinces. 
  7. Confused
  8. Dislike
    Eastert got a reaction from PETER in Why all the strategy games will never be realistic   
    In our real world the history is built on one single thing - genetics of the nations, and more pre—Āisely on the phisiological¬†intelligence of the people. The europeans colonised the whole world exactly because of their phisological ability to resolve the complex tasks. How can small Japan or Britain or even Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal¬†colonise much bigger nations? Why do this countries have now the best economic, science, military, etc... So if the game developers will not use this factor (phisiological¬†intelligence of different nations) the strategy-games will always be unrealistic. I'm not talking about adding to the game the intelligent rate like techology or science. I mean that it should be determinated that for example germans will be always more intelligent throuh the game. Constantly.
    P.S. We all have different heigth, wheight, color, different voices - why is it wrong to have different brains? By the way, as well as the brain is much more sophisticated and detalised device then the leg-bone, it has the potential to variete not just in 40% but in 4000% between people.
  9. Like
    Eastert got a reaction from aijec in Dark Theme   
    "Dark reader" in google-webstore if you use chrome
  10. Love
    Eastert reacted to Shrimpy5678 in Maybe a bit more historical focus?   
    I love playing the WW2 scenario, but it really annoys me when the game goes completely off the rails historically and the British Raj takes over all of Europe. I'm not necessarily saying that there needs to be a script for certain foreign powers, but maybe some more powerful nations should be enticed to stick to the general region that they started in. I understand why the most powerful AI decide to go attack the wealthiest provinces, but it seems like a little too much some times. That's all.
  11. Like
    Eastert got a reaction from jatogel in Dark Theme   
    "Dark reader" in google-webstore if you use chrome
  12. Like
    Eastert got a reaction from goktug14 in Lukash, make a brush! [please]   
    He's not silent, 5 days ago he said that 3 years of work on AOC2 is enough
  13. Sad
    Eastert got a reaction from AllahuSnackbar in Will Lukasz ever update the game?   
    No updates for almost 2 months...
  14. Sad
    Eastert got a reaction from Dermelles in Will Lukasz ever update the game?   
    No updates for almost 2 months...
  15. Like
    Eastert got a reaction from Dermelles in My suggestions   
    1) - I meant capturing empty province. Now the minimum amount of army to take the province wdhout army is 10, i suggested that your army must be over 1% of civilian population of this hostile province.
    3) Not movement points, but money
    4) Playing as Germany i can invade Poland in 1939 and completly assimilate it till maybe 1941. Is that realistic? And i think more - assimilation should worsen the way all other countries treat you, at least democratic countries.
    7) No, never met this in the game. But saw a lot of pockets of armies migrating through entire enemy's mainland.
    8.) How did britains captured the entire India, Australia, North America, a lot of very populated nations in the middle east? - answer is a technology level. And proportions were much bigger than just in 10 times.
  16. Like
    Eastert got a reaction from Dermelles in My suggestions   
    1) Minimum army to attack and capture any province must be over 1% of province population.
    2) If the nation lost 60% of its population then it should capitulate.
    3) sea movements must cost 20-time more expensive than the same number of troops in land (or look at 6 point)
    4) assimilation must be much slower (or you can make deportation?)
    5) It must be much more expensive to maintain the far territories than those, that closer. So countries wich have normal borders will have better economic, so they will prevail and the bordergore-countries will not survive very long
    6) Actually i dont like when people write about types of units, but there's a single type wich can bring a lot of realistic stuff to the game - the naval units. The naval units will protect the naval provinces, so the enemy will not be able to move his land troops to these provinces if he didn't defeat the enemy's naval troops by his ones there. Thus, the control of the seas will lead to the control of the world), like in the real history.
    7) If the army appeared to be encircled by the enemy and it's staying there for 3 turns (being totally unconnected to its mainland or capital) then its capacity to fight decreases twice. I mean that 100 of its soldiers will have the strengh only like 50 of enemy soldiers. And then its strength will only decline. Or maybe even the % of units number itself will disappear.
    Another idea - if the army is encircled by the enemy and unconnected with its capital then it must take huge number of diplomacy points to manage units in it. And there's only 50% random possibility that they will not be frozen and able to move. I believe it will totally resolve the strange-border-problem during the wars.
    ūüėé I dont know if it's executed already but i¬†want the units¬†of the different countries to have different strength. It should depend¬†on the technology rate. If country¬†has the technology rate¬†-¬†1.0 then its 100 units should be able to defeat 1000 units of the country wich has 0.1 technology rate.
  17. Like
    Eastert reacted to Checkmate in A form of capitulation   
    This game could really use capitulation, because it often causes endless wars or countries not accepting peace because they have only about 2% of their provinces left
    So I propose that we have capitulation based of province value % remaining, for example. If the ussr has lost 65% of their province points they should capitulate, this would balance out large cities and rural areas having different values
     
  18. Like
    Eastert got a reaction from German Empire 1871 in My suggestions   
    1) Minimum army to attack and capture any province must be over 1% of province population.
    2) If the nation lost 60% of its population then it should capitulate.
    3) sea movements must cost 20-time more expensive than the same number of troops in land (or look at 6 point)
    4) assimilation must be much slower (or you can make deportation?)
    5) It must be much more expensive to maintain the far territories than those, that closer. So countries wich have normal borders will have better economic, so they will prevail and the bordergore-countries will not survive very long
    6) Actually i dont like when people write about types of units, but there's a single type wich can bring a lot of realistic stuff to the game - the naval units. The naval units will protect the naval provinces, so the enemy will not be able to move his land troops to these provinces if he didn't defeat the enemy's naval troops by his ones there. Thus, the control of the seas will lead to the control of the world), like in the real history.
    7) If the army appeared to be encircled by the enemy and it's staying there for 3 turns (being totally unconnected to its mainland or capital) then its capacity to fight decreases twice. I mean that 100 of its soldiers will have the strengh only like 50 of enemy soldiers. And then its strength will only decline. Or maybe even the % of units number itself will disappear.
    Another idea - if the army is encircled by the enemy and unconnected with its capital then it must take huge number of diplomacy points to manage units in it. And there's only 50% random possibility that they will not be frozen and able to move. I believe it will totally resolve the strange-border-problem during the wars.
    ūüėé I dont know if it's executed already but i¬†want the units¬†of the different countries to have different strength. It should depend¬†on the technology rate. If country¬†has the technology rate¬†-¬†1.0 then its 100 units should be able to defeat 1000 units of the country wich has 0.1 technology rate.
  19. Like
    Eastert got a reaction from izifront in My suggestions   
    1) Minimum army to attack and capture any province must be over 1% of province population.
    2) If the nation lost 60% of its population then it should capitulate.
    3) sea movements must cost 20-time more expensive than the same number of troops in land (or look at 6 point)
    4) assimilation must be much slower (or you can make deportation?)
    5) It must be much more expensive to maintain the far territories than those, that closer. So countries wich have normal borders will have better economic, so they will prevail and the bordergore-countries will not survive very long
    6) Actually i dont like when people write about types of units, but there's a single type wich can bring a lot of realistic stuff to the game - the naval units. The naval units will protect the naval provinces, so the enemy will not be able to move his land troops to these provinces if he didn't defeat the enemy's naval troops by his ones there. Thus, the control of the seas will lead to the control of the world), like in the real history.
    7) If the army appeared to be encircled by the enemy and it's staying there for 3 turns (being totally unconnected to its mainland or capital) then its capacity to fight decreases twice. I mean that 100 of its soldiers will have the strengh only like 50 of enemy soldiers. And then its strength will only decline. Or maybe even the % of units number itself will disappear.
    Another idea - if the army is encircled by the enemy and unconnected with its capital then it must take huge number of diplomacy points to manage units in it. And there's only 50% random possibility that they will not be frozen and able to move. I believe it will totally resolve the strange-border-problem during the wars.
    ūüėé I dont know if it's executed already but i¬†want the units¬†of the different countries to have different strength. It should depend¬†on the technology rate. If country¬†has the technology rate¬†-¬†1.0 then its 100 units should be able to defeat 1000 units of the country wich has 0.1 technology rate.
  20. Like
    Eastert got a reaction from Pierrot69stf in My suggestions   
    1) Minimum army to attack and capture any province must be over 1% of province population.
    2) If the nation lost 60% of its population then it should capitulate.
    3) sea movements must cost 20-time more expensive than the same number of troops in land (or look at 6 point)
    4) assimilation must be much slower (or you can make deportation?)
    5) It must be much more expensive to maintain the far territories than those, that closer. So countries wich have normal borders will have better economic, so they will prevail and the bordergore-countries will not survive very long
    6) Actually i dont like when people write about types of units, but there's a single type wich can bring a lot of realistic stuff to the game - the naval units. The naval units will protect the naval provinces, so the enemy will not be able to move his land troops to these provinces if he didn't defeat the enemy's naval troops by his ones there. Thus, the control of the seas will lead to the control of the world), like in the real history.
    7) If the army appeared to be encircled by the enemy and it's staying there for 3 turns (being totally unconnected to its mainland or capital) then its capacity to fight decreases twice. I mean that 100 of its soldiers will have the strengh only like 50 of enemy soldiers. And then its strength will only decline. Or maybe even the % of units number itself will disappear.
    Another idea - if the army is encircled by the enemy and unconnected with its capital then it must take huge number of diplomacy points to manage units in it. And there's only 50% random possibility that they will not be frozen and able to move. I believe it will totally resolve the strange-border-problem during the wars.
    ūüėé I dont know if it's executed already but i¬†want the units¬†of the different countries to have different strength. It should depend¬†on the technology rate. If country¬†has the technology rate¬†-¬†1.0 then its 100 units should be able to defeat 1000 units of the country wich has 0.1 technology rate.
  21. Like
    Eastert reacted to Mr.Hitler in Bordergore   
    bordergore is bad
×
×
  • Create New...