All Activity

That should be addressed by specific anti-cavalry formations (again, as it was historically).

Light melee cavalry needs to be faster than ranged cavalry. FTFY. Ranged cavalry, being light, should certainly be faster than heavy cavalry. If we make disengaging from the enemy quite costly (as it was historically) either in time or in blood (the choice between the two options being made by the player through specific formations), then we can have light cavalry engaging the ranged cavalry and the heavy cavalry coming behind them to finish the job. Is it difficult to implement Charges mechanism with cooldown timer after use ? That would allow even light infantry to somehow counter ranged cavalry, and more so for champion cavalry.

If they have a toggle for their behavior after being out of ammo "go fight in melee/go reload" then no it's not too micro-intensive. They could even have toggles about what to do after spending half their ammo : keep firing until no ammo/lower their rate of fire (with lower rate of fire should come better accuracy).

It's probably the best way to solve the problem, yes. But I wouldn't have it replace the different stances, rather parameter what each stance means (like in "passive" stance, do the unit flee at first attack or after having lost 10% hp ? does it go to a safe distance from enemy units and then stand idle, or go back to its task once it's out of range of the enemy ? In "aggressive" stance, how far do they go from their allied units ? Do they pursue someone who is faster than them or not ?). Also, we could use work formations for Citizen-Soldiers : go work as a group, and if one member of the formation is attacked, they all fight back (but if someone not of their work formation is attacked, they keep working).

I noticed that too, and I kinda like it. Way less micromanagy that way - you only need to keep your unit/building alive, not to care about how much it will cost you (beyond the repair time) to repair them.

Ranged units cannot die too fast to (mêlée) cavalry. Cavalry are supposed to bring havoc to ranged units if they get to them. If you don't want your ranged units to die to cavalry, don't expose them to cavalry ! What we need though are formations dedicated to interdict passage : where units would engage enemy units in a way that is maybe less destructive (reduce number of strikes by 2 or something) but prevent the enemy unit to pass through the formation. That would both make protecting ranged units more sensible, and remove the situations where your troops are between a building and the enemy coming to garrison in it, but they still are able to garrison...

Reporting user Malavita for quitting rated game. 2025-08-17_0007.zip

Not sure whether that's still useful to answer it now, but yes they can. And it's very frustrating when on the same map (I believe that this happens in the skirmish islands map) some are reachable by horsemen and some others are one pixel too far in the water so aren't reachable but that fact can only be learned once you've sent the horseman there...

Definitely agree about the speed reduction, current cavalry is way to fast on screen, you barely get any time to react to their coming and going

That is a rather cool perk. I would be in favour of a negative multiplier as an interesting alternative to a positive one. Adding positives takes us closer to Age II levels of Spear/Cav counters, and I would prefer we did not have that degree

Seems to be the best place to re-mention this, the Roman First Cohort Legionaries are missing their legionary keyword and subsequently are not being affected by the Centurion century manoeuvres bonus. Which is quite the nuisance at times when your centurions outpace the units they are supposed to be commanding. I was told a few months ago this was an error, so am hoping for a fix eventually

@Fabius there was already a precedent for that, so it's possible. Elephants had a "Stench" aura in the early alphas. What that actually meant is they had 50% additional damage reduction from cavalry attacks.

Digging through the old discussions, I've struck a gold mine. Here it is for some developer nostalgia https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PxeSahVf5J6h32jy2iqTHlnogtQSHPocXKqNSspyMUs/edit?tab=t.0

What about a damage reduction bonus that has spearmen take less damage from cavalry, a reverse multiplier if you will, specifically for melee cavalry. Eg does 0.75 damage against spear/pike troops.

Thx that fixed it. Always forget that git lfs :D.

Else invert G

See the note at https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/src/branch/main/.lfsconfig

Sure, but then we need actual viable defenses, otherwise this "tactic" does not have counter play. And ita in no way engaging or interesting.

Let's not include virtue signaling in a historical war strategy game. Heroes and generals of the past were usually far from noble.

You're free to move your hero, it's micro. However, there's no reason why a fleeing unit should run faster. and of course a heroe can kill woman and run!

Regarding the hero abuse, we can change its preferred attack categories to prevent it from attacking women. We can also remove the passive stance from the unit. Reasons: 1. Attacking defenseless women is a war criminal (coward) move and is contrary to heroic. Therefore the heroes shouldn't be doing this. The gameplay justification is that some civs have sword cav heroes which can sneak into enemy base and kill women, while other civs don't. This is an imbalance. 2. If a hero is fleeing from the fight then it is no longer a hero but a coward. Heroes die in battle. Therefore they should not have the passive stance. However, it's a perfectly valid strategy for a player to withdraw or move around a defensive mode / aggressive mode hero manually. It's acceptable to try to save your hero from dying in battle.

Hey guys, i updated a branch on my development fork. If i want to push the changes, ill have to enter my credentials even if i cloned it with my configured ssh key. Does anyone have the same problem ? And if i do that, than it will not accept it either. Had the problem bot on fedora 41 and opensuse tumbleweed.

Yknow, thats something you could say about the "send your cavalry hero alone into the enemy food economy"-"tactic"... Thats a weakness in gamedesign. But using formations to trap enemy units? skill. And while hero dancing doesnt take much skill, it also doesnt take much skill to just not follow the hero and have an eye on what your units are doing. If you blindly send your units to attack the enemy hero and then stop looking at them, thats your problem. 1. I didnt defend cheats, I just pointed out how nonsensical your "solutions" are. Come up with a solution that actually helps and you wont get any comment from me. 2. None of my friends cheat. While I dont have any problem with @Atrik (who you're probably referring to?), I dont know him enough to call him "friend".

When one player has more kills than the sum of enemy team: The key to this is the Will To Fight tech which allows you to hold outnumbered 1v2 battles

I. No need for a new thread. Already discussed in other threads. II. I like how you structured and formatted your original post, @king reza the great! What I don't like is the absence of hyperlinks (it's the internet!) to the corresponding topics. Understanding that you may not want to link to topics that you consider ‘abusive’ or ‘exploitative’; nevertheless I find it unfriendly that users first have to research for themselves. We are in a open source software forum (sub forum 'Bug reports') here! For the sake of peace (and my own time) only the topics on 'overpowert units':