Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates

  1. Past hour
  2. Umm.... no? From Wikipedia: "In calculus, the differential represents the principal part of the change in a function y = f(x) with respect to changes in the independent variable. The differential dy is defined by where is the derivative of f with respect to x, and dx is an additional real variable (so that dy is a function of x and dx)." Where's the concept of a limit in that definition?
  3. Ζ ζ zeta, ζήτα [zd], or possibly [dz] sd as in English wisdom, or possibly dz as in English adze[14][15][note 1] [z] z as in English zoo
  4. also, everyone knows that to make a differential, you just need a number of gears.
  5. wait, isn't the derivative of a function defined using limits? If the limit doesn't exist the function is not derivable, is it?
  6. Also, why would you even need the concept of a limit to define what a differential equation is? f(x) = dy/dx is a differential equation, and it doesn't use the concept of a limit.
  7. Today
  8. That does not work. First of all, that formula does not make sense if the limit does not exist. Secondly, you don't make the differential by that way, it is calculated that way. The differential of a function exists or does not, regardless of whether you can calculate it. So in that sense you don't make the differential.
  9. yes i have some extra hobby
  10. ptole are popular in 1v1 matches. they feel OP at least among players of my (middle) level. Also carthage is quite popular. I don't know why iberians are not played more, they really really really need a nerf for their crazy OP fire champions.
  11. Are you satisfy of your work? Do u want to change your current job?
  12. I need to warn you. @Player of 0AD is a dirty boomer WierdJokes=boomer.zip
  13. I could only agree on this if A46 would be named tesamen
  14. Firstly I will name some things you can do if you are able to collect more resources than your opponent: 1. Transform your food economy to corrals and cavalry, which means you need less women and can get more army. 2. Get will to fight. 3. Build an wonder and get the glorious expansion technology. In the game replay section of the forum I posted some games where Havran did this to show it can be vialbe. 4. Make champions. I don't believe any of these options themselves create imbalance. The imbalance is caused by the fact that some players are able to put themselves into a position to use these options. Only eliminating champions as an option wont stop the players in the better position to use these options. Extra berries allow for some extra boom and a quick ram attack. Delaying the rate at which rams can be produced does not really solve the problem. I saw Havran using option 3 to get a population advantage and if you make it slower to attack Havrans team, option 3 will only get more potent as it is more difficult to punish. Also you do not need siege to hit your opponent hard. I think a bigger problem for early knock-outs is the fact that an army benefits so much from the final pierce armor technology as that allows you to take very favourable fights. Making a fortress a requirement to produce rams seems bad to me, as you force people to build fortresses even if they want to play aggressively. If I had to make a guess, that has probably more to do with bad play/teamwork than that it has to with bad design. Why did your ally lost his CC so early? Didn't his team help him?
  15. That opinion was expected for you ;P How could you say that they lack an easy counter against siege if you mentioned it a few lines earlier? That counter is called Ptolemy soter and is available from the CC. The Iberian team bonus is the best team bonus there is. So you are possible comparing two things which are both OP. In a language that @Yekaterina understands if we have two values of infinity with one being bigger, thus ∞>∞, then it does not mean the right hand expression is small. This is not true. They are best suited for hit and run tactics and stay on large range. The issue is that if you try to kill a women from 60 meters, you need like 20 arrows, because of inaccuracy. The inaccuracy really keeps them down. Also they are slower than Javelin cavalry. However with Ptolemies you can afford to build the stable early and get the +10% speed tech. I like to get this technology in my rushes, without it the rush feels very risky. I feel the camel rush is only feasible because of the strong economy. Nerfing them feels not needed to me. In team games, balance is vastly different because people need to adapt to the fact that they will be playing with players of different skill level. If all players have similar skill levels, I think the popularity of many of those factions would drop. In 1v1s, Ptolemies are the very best and no other faction has a fair chance against them IMHO. Some might disagree and say that Iberians have a fair chance against them. If this is true, then I would say no there faction has a fair chance against Ptolemies or Iberians. They are a cut above of the rest. I agree mostly with the 9 points that Yekaterina made. I would add a number 10 to that: Can train heroes from the CC. This gives a great timing advantage over most other factions. I think the option to nerf the heroes is the most fitting of the 3 suggestions. I would also propose an indirect nerf: rebalance so that the pikeman is no longer OP. The food trickle is really nice in the first 2 minutes, where it allows you to get more units and let that snowball for you. In the lategame it is negligible. So halving it does not feel good. It also is historically accurate as Egypt was the breadbasket for the middle east. Maybe a team bonus that gives mercenaries shorter train time might also be fitting for them, but for me we can keep it as it is.
  16. If formations were working there would be a lot of room for differentiation based on how the units are moved around the battlefield. On a separate note, more support units like trumpets, drums, flag/standard bearers, supply wagons, etc would be another way to further change how civs are played. An elephant in the room is that people want to play sometimes vastly different games. For some, they want the game to be over and done with within 20 minutes, some even less. Others might enjoy longer games. Some want a deathmatch with boundless resources. Perhaps a further refinement of the game types available would be one way to branch off the different ideas. I wouldn't want to split the community too much, but like with all games there are different "groups" who play a certain way that don't quite understand how other people can have fun doing something else (like not taking advantage of every last disparity between units and civs). Personally, as someone who has studied ancient civilizations in an academic setting and into my adult life, I'd like to see more attention paid to things like formations, defenses, economics, logistics. From this perspective, terrain and strategy should account for more than it currently does. Ideally there would even be seasonal changes within the game which affect the pace of the match (in the eastern Mediterranean the summer was the fighting season and the winter was farming, in part due to temperature/precip patterns but also due to changes in wind and seaworthiness of the vessels at the time). That said, I don't need free open source Total War clone: the current game is still a lot of fun, I simply find that there are a lot of elements of this game and its genre that haven't been pushed forward much lately. It is too easy of course for someone without coding ability to say what would be nice or not, so I leave this here not to say this game isn't playable, but rather as a general wish to see some refinement on the above.
  17. I think it would not help to push the game to the public. I think games that are popular result in high prizepool tournament. I don't see it automatically working the other way around.
  18. Hello! I'm upping this thread because I think there are a couple of interesting ideas going on. None of this is highly a priority in the dev schedule, but maybe is a worthy discussion idk.. Anyway I was recently messing around with map building in the atlas editor and I've realized there's a lack of proper "villages" in the game. Especially if you want to simulate the aspect of a rural countryside, you're forced to drop a CC to place other buildings around, and this "ruins" the purpose. I like the DE alternative of giving free room to dropsites even outside the player territory, but I was thinking that another alternative could be to consider a "village center" for early expansion. I think it may have been mentioned also in other threads, but basically this would be a cheaper sort of military colony with some root territory around that can substitute the CC effectively. Some people have mentioned that great game of Imperivm in another thread (happy it enjoys some popularity!), and that's basically what I'm thinking of: a small center dedicated exclusively for economic activities that allows you to expand further and have more room for farms and dropsites. Possibly, military buildings can't be built around this territory (so to not exploit this), unless such village is upgraded to full CC, gaining then full features. I think such a feature can maybe encourage expansions earlier in the game, and, again, make more use of the whole map. What do you guys would think of this? Too dumb? Unnecessary? I'm curious to hear some opinions!
  19. *Sad Carthaginian noises Good idea though Or, we can just call it Zeta. Zusammen? (On the same side, togetherness
  20. Towers do nothing against camels! If you come with 7 camels or more then the tower is completely useless.
  21. @user1 My Lobby Name: DerekO Offender: Thomas13012m He left game after first attack and I didn't notice so I finished the game just to see I did not get my reward he didn't contact me in anyway commands.txt
  22. Thank you. I'll look into it (might take a while, though).
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...