All Activity

For 16

if i can change the setting of keybind for camera i can try send some scrennshot

War Elephants (only the Carthage has them here) saving the day from a 2-pronged attack. They ruined my economy and killed a bunch of fodder, oh well...

@guerringuerrin thanks for the suggestion, I might have overstepped a bit. However, I seem to have forgotten my MP password. Also, I don't think any of you guys play Alpha 9 right now It really feels like a different game. So clunky, so chaotic.

This might just be me, but some level of interpolation would make animations look miles better

I personallly think that cav javeleneers are broken. 100 food+50 wood is insanely cheap for such a good unit. Also, try melee units. They are a good counter

I've got a good one somewhere, but it was only because my opponent was very predictable. A lot of different p2 rushes are devastating if your opponent is doing the same strat over and over.

This replay isn't that great, but it might be better than nothing. Imo it shows rather that fanatics are expensive and hard to get than that they are op. Which they aren't. commands.txt

I think it's too hasty to say that Fanatics are OP and should be nerfed. I believe the adjustment made to them actually enriched the game and introduced a new strategy that forces all of us out of our comfort zones and encourages more creativity. As @chrstgtr mentioned earlier, I think what we’re seeing here is the typical panic from a player when a strategy they’ve perfected and repeated countless times is suddenly put at risk. I don’t feel the same way about champ cav, particularly Gauls and Seleucids, and I still believe it would be good to slightly adjust their stats or improve a unit that can serve as a counter to champ cavs. This doesn’t mean a nerf so strong that it renders a costly late-game unit useless — one for which a player clearly deserves to be rewarded — but in its current state it feels more like the endgame goal that everyone rushes to in order to decide the outcome of a match, and personally, I find that dynamic boring. A parallel reflection that comes to mind from this debate is that, in many multiplayer RTS games, a certain strategy often becomes the meta and seems unbeatable — and this leads other players to develop new strategies to counter it, which enriches the evolution of the game. There are many examples of this in 0 A.D., but I won’t go into detail to avoid making this too long. I believe the current dynamic in many multiplayer matches is to ‘play it safe’ — which basically means booming — and this stifles creativity and discourages players from trying new things out of fear of completely failing and being seen as weak players. What if u go play some multiplayer and see how it goes by yourself? No trolling intended here, but I find very difficult to achieve that players start sharing replays to make the point. Replays aren't even named, so it's a tedious job to identify them. And it's not very motivating to go through all that work just to show it to a singleplayer-focused player, since — at least with the current state of the game's AI — multiplayer and singleplayer feel like completely different games.

Buenos días: -Estamos casi terminando las facciones americanas, en breve comenzaremos con las africanas: Adena (EE.UU/Ohio) Anishinaabe (Canada) Swift Creek (EE.UU,Georgia) Pámpidos: (argentina) Guaraní (Paraguay) Disculpen las moelstias*

That one seems too short. What a random answer! Look at my spoiler-hint.

Only one comes to mind for me. Is it ?

That can totally be the case. But in this specific game, he could most likely have achieved the same (or more) by going cav. Just because they worked in one game, doesnt mean they are broken. He just chose a good strategy for this one game.

That's because we haven't 1vs1 today.

You might be right, we'll see I hope not, I'm really liking this one.

Every old version you play, you say the same thing. In 15 minutes, you'll announce that you're taking back everything you said before

The best version for casual play. 1) Has all original civilizations, 2) No tech tree, it's all in how you use resources for units and structures, 3) The AI is smart enough to do the same, 4) Introduced my favorite and the best ancient civilization, 5) Counter system that works and 6 it has a cool name.

I’m not a pro but what Aslan did using fanatics can be done by any decent player. Gauls in the pocket and no one disrupt him (there was an attempt but foiled by fanatics), he just simply use fanatics and imo with less micro. He’s just attacking suicidal and imo he doesn’t care if they die because he can simply easily produce them “non-stop” with only food and wood which he has abundantly. Metal were just for upgrade and a couple of stone for temples (8). Before researching P3 ahead of anybody all cavalry rushers are already neutralized. Now pumping minimum of 24 fanas fully P2 upgraded and CS and women were just gathering, his teammates can just relax and building up forces for continuous assault. Fanatics are not fighting main frontal forces they simply disrupt your game and without metal requirements imo they are OP (mostly on TG). Meanwhile opponents are still trying to upgrade their units. He never use cavalry except his starting one. The game I spectated was 7/26, players were Mcaurell, Atric-lll, wolf, storm on T1. Aslan, Havran, potato and Docorgans on T2. I just don’t know how to upload it, trying but failed. Please moderator delete my empty posts above.

New day new hint:

Yes exatly. My point is that there are group of ecobot celt players who bonus celt for their wishes.

Ok lets play corral with sword infantery for pick the goat for wood we can palisade the entire forest

Well, fanatics do lose against sufficient infantry. But that doesnt mean its not a very strong tactic. For one, as reza mentioned, the rushing player will often head for the food economy first, as women cant defend themselves very well. And for that use case, having more power in fewer units is very strong, as a larger force gets noticed sooner and suffers more from blocking each other/pathing issues. Also, while it is definitely defendable when you pull together some troops, you have to consider two problems: 1. When the fanatic rusher has massed about ~20 fanatics, they can take on any soldiers you put on any extra metal/stone or a small woodline. And given their speed, you cant really get your main force, thats working somewhere else, to help in time. 2. There are major economic implications in fighting with all your cs. Of course, he invested a lot of resources to make the fanatics aswell, but if you are chasing 20 fanatics with 40 cs and fight them for like, 30s, you already lost 40•30•0.75=900 wood just by not using them to gather. That being said, fanatic rushes are not as easy to pull off as reza implies. They are quite costly and its not as easy to micro as cav (since they are still slower). Its a strategy that needs a lot of investment and skill and has potentially massive reward. Such strategies are very good for a video game and the fanatics shouldnt be touched at all imho.

@Dakara you can stop arguing with a guy who has never played a lobby tg lmao. and it's not fanas that are op, it's THE CIV. THE GODdarn CIV ITSELF IS OP. THEY GOT THE BEST CHAMP CAV, BEST ECO, BEST HERO, MOST ECONOMIC CHAMP, SLINGERS! ONLY WAY TO SAY THEY'RE WORSE IS THAT THEY DON'T HAVE BOLTS OR CATAS

We can argue about minor details for days, but until you show me some replays, I'm not going to reply to questions that have obvious answers.