Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Trade carts are inherently more vulnerable to ranged units than melee units, speed boost or not. The speed boost accentuates this even more, but it is definitely a feature that ES intended. The speed boost also helps the trade revenue come faster, obviously.
Removing the tech would cause there to be no difference between trade carts in Feudal, Castle, or Imperial, which would be rather uninteresting and not make sense. Granted, no halfway decent player would use trade carts in Feudal or Castle anyway, but there needs to be some natural sense of progression nonetheless. Trade is perfectly balanced as it is and there is no need to change the attributes of the carts or the techs affecting them.
Why then not just increase the speed of trade carts once imperial age is researched?
-You can say that about any tech though, no?
EDIT: Just saw Dare Devil's post, and I agree. Increased automation caters to laziness and is not a good thing for a RTS game.
With other technologies, the logical progression argument is clearly right, because you have to balance researching it too late or too early - compare the cost of Ballistics in Castle age with the cost of war galleys, cav archers or crossbows: getting it will leave you with better, but fewer troops, in the scramble to raid and pressure the enemy. So you are deciding on a smaller force with ballistics, or a larger force without, and although you'll always research it eventually, that's an interesting choice.
By contrast with the Caravan tech it's a choice between making another cart or researching the tech: there's just no pressure there. You'll always have the tech by the time trade carts are in the game in force, which is a stark contrast from choosing ballistics or 3 extra galleys in mid castle.
Other Imperial Age eco techs aren't universal, so they contribute to the game by differentiating the civs. Also, the Caravan tech seems uniquely boring because of the huge impact it has on a large number of carts, compared to its small cost, and because the alternative is in practice to make another cart and then get it: so either way you're choosing to expand your trade.
I can live with Roadrunner carts being able to thumb their noses at Hussars, but in a late imperial team game Caravan is one of the most important techs, and is also one of the last to take full effect in view of the lifespan of gold mines and the time it takes to train new carts. I'd rather have the Caravan tech than the Siege Onager tech, I think, even though Siege Onager costs 1450 food and 1000 gold, and Caravan is only 200 of each. Perhaps another way to improve the strategic depth provided by the Caravan tech would be to greatly increase its cost? It would also contribute to the sense of progression, since there would now be a real choice to be made instead of always getting it even if you only have a measly halfdozen carts.