The original AI on the highest difficulty is pretty impossible to fight against one-on-one. When I play with a friend, it is always 3-vs-5 to let the 1 AI on our team take the hits while we build up. Most times, the AI will survive as we will be helping it as much as we can. But, Holy Hell, that initial rush from all 5 enemy AIs when you are still in Feudal...
Yeah the Hardest AI, whether standard or new cheats 100% of the time. It gets resources as it ages up. I don't remember how much but all you need to do to check is start a recorded game vs a hardest AI and have the game reach imperial age. You can watch the recorded game from the AI's POV to see how much it gets every time it ages up. You can cheese all the AIs a fair bit though, especially the old one. A good way to stall them is by placing buildings on the way from their base to yours and they'll waste a lot of time attacking it with their rush instead of attacking your base. Stone walls are great for this because they sometimes stick around until every last one is destroyed. This of course requires you to advance to feudal before they do which can be difficult on standard starting resources. Starting on fortress will also help since you start with a small economy and some defenses to boot.
Walls and such delay them for a few minutes at most. It won't be enough to save your ass. It is best to have a AI buddy who can match them to take the hits. It will get destroyed but at least it will give you enough time to have a chance.
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-6200U CPU @ 2.30GHz, 2401 Mhz, 2 Core(s), 4 Logical Processor(s)
Apparently it doesn't cheat since HD. That's what Spirit of the Law on YT says:
Sounds right. I'm basically trying to click as fast as I can and expand, slowly learning hot keys and trying to choose techs less randomly. I get enough units to protect myself from occasional attacks and then swarm both AIs at 1:00h mark.
Random map, standard, conquest.
Pretty sure that once you've deforested an entire map you've got different things on your mind than the gold you get from the trees.
So that's where they got it from. Although they've borrowed many ideas from AoE3, I was thinking that there wasn't a livestock garrisoning trickle mechanic in it AoE3 specifically. I always thought it was a variation on the AoE3 Japanese getting food trickle bonus from placing houses near deer / bison / 'phants.
Not garrisoning, but in Empire Earth, it had a mechanic where the animals multiplied over time, so you can husband them for food.
Wow that might have been how sheep would have eventually ended up if Rick Goodman stayed at Ensemble. While AoE2 always seemed to me to be an upgrade over AoE1 in every aspect, AoM seemed to be a natural evolution rather than the huge jump from 1 to 2 while AoE3 seemed like a further evolution of AoM. I've never played EE but it seems like that was what Goodman saw as the rightful progression of the AoE formula. With hindsight though, I'm glad AoE2 and the rest of the series lived on without such scope-creep because having clubs to bows and arrows to nukes in a single game seems arcade-ey, even even compared to monks snipe-converting elephants and musketeers destroying buildings with beerbottles.
Nope, old Indians were trash historically and unit diversity-wise. A civilization that used camels instead of horses, didn't have melee elephant units and had hand cannoneers didn't exist ever. To count that civ as Indians makes as much sense as having a civ that is a mix of Brit+Scots+Irish or a ''German'' civ that's a mixture of Teutons+Goths+Sicilians.
You have to pander to the commiecunt revisionist $$$, you know.
Yeah I know, the impossibility of a Tibetan civ was discussed earlier in the thread. Fortunately, its easier to offend said cult than make it buy your games; as can be seen with the developer inactivity around AoM: Tale of the Dragon and TW: Three Kingdoms. At least they don't offer up their money for bad games in a patriotic skin.
This happened yesterday:
