All Activity

Well, it's not to completely negate, but acts as a modifier. Thus, you have values of pierce (p), hack (h), crush (c), block (b), parry (a) and dodge (d), both for attack (A) and defense (D): pA, hA, cA, bA, aA, dA, pD, hD, cD, bD, aD, dD. For example, aA is how hard is to parry its attack, aD is how easily it parries attacks. The better for the unit the bigger the values are. As a proof of concept, a naive formula for the damage the attacker deals to a defender could be (pA/pD+hA/hD+cA/cD)(bA/bD)(aA/aD)(dA/dD), meaning that all damage, after being divided by each corresponding defender's resistance, is added up, and then multiplied by factors related to the probability (it's NOT directly a probability) of the attack being either blocked, parried or dodged (just adding them up is problematic). Here I'm showing the (rounded) results, with 10 taken as an average value, and other parameters like rate of fire, movement speed and range not yet taken into account: This means that the damage ratio for spearmen:cavalry is 3:1 (as wanted), for cavalry:archers is 6:4 (which makes sense, cavalry would get destroyed by archers if they don't close in, like in Agincourt), and for archers:spearmen is 2:5 (which makes sense, the advantage of archers being not this but keeping their distance). Remember that rate of fire, movement speed and range not yet taken into account, which would incline more the scales to what is wanted. Also, archers:archers is 4 times more destructive than cavalry:cavalry, which is twice as destructive as spearmen:spearmen, which makes sense considering how long these kind of engagements last. Would be nice to keep adding units.

The issue with building a system revolving on different archer types, is that for balancing, it would be necessary to give it to most civs. No matter what historical justifications one might find. Personally, I feel like the current system, with archers, slingers, and javelineers, isn't being used to its full potential.

I think because the bow was smaller, the draw string was tighter so it would create more force but didnt have the distance. I could totally be wrong and am willing to make any changes once I come across new evidence.

Well, no. A javelin throws javelins; a shortbow unit uses a bow and arrows. And my guess is a Javelineer would be slower than a shortbow archer bc higher carry weight?? Answering to both of you here: Nah I didn't even check this. I was just following the logic of what Thalatta said here: But probably misunderstood the logic and he was talking about the arrow deal more/less damage depending target distance... To be honest, I’m not very interested in realism or historical accuracy, and I don’t know much about it so I leave that to those who do. I’m more interested in gameplay. And I’d be willing to sacrifice historical accuracy to prioritize gameplay, variety, and so on. But I’m not trying to argue anything (just to be clear). In general, archers feel quite weak in the latest alphas and also lack variety, with the exception of some champion archers. So I guess my "proposal" would be that A shortbow could have higher dexterity and a faster attack speed (with less damage, based on what I now understand), while a longbow could be slower but have greater range and deal more damage.

Wouldn't that simply be a Javelineer? Also, why should a shortbow deal more damage from a realism perspective?

If I have understood that correctly, and to simplify it a bit, in addition to Resistances that reduces the damage by a certain percentage there is also a block / dodge mechanic that completely negates the damage of a melee attack / projectile. Would certainly give you more options to make one unit type effective against certain other units types. E.g. cavalry has high dodge but low block to make them effective against ranged units but "bad" against melee units.

Again we made some adjustments with ranges in CWA... Lead bullet slingers were known to out range archers.... greek archers didn't have the range of persian archers and other civs... but they were know for their shield (better resistance) and we gave them slight dmg buff. A lot of great info out there if you look for it!

Well, I just wanted to buff them a bit, maybe I went too far Regarding "short-range ranged unit with higher damage", wouldn't/shouldn't that be the javelineers? Longer (effective) range should be some slingers. I see that the Macedonians already have quite some specific units, but an interesting one is the Kestrophendone, which would enter late in the game, it's a heavy dart thrown with a sling, and it was really devastating (but apparently hard to make). Ranges are debated, but tests indicate shorter than a bow. Also, I just noticed that Rhodian Slingers have 45m range, while Cretan Archers have 60m range, I guess this comes from myths put forward by other games regarding Cretan archers... For the Persians, I see that Sogdian Archers and Immortals have also 60m range. Xenophon's Anabasis states: "For at present the enemy can shoot arrows and sling stones so far that neither our Cretan bowmen nor our javelin-men can reach them in reply" and "the barbarians were no longer able to do any harm by their skirmishing at long range; for the Rhodian slingers carried farther with their missiles than the Persians, farther even than the Persian bowmen", thus ranges were: Cretan archers < Persian slingers < Persian bowmen < Rhodian slingers. Cretan archers were good for the Greek world, but were outranged by other specialised range units. Also: "Now I am told that there are Rhodians in our army, that most of them understand the use of the sling, and that their missile carries no less than twice as far as those from the Persian slings. For the latter have only a short range because the stones that are used in them are as large as the hand can hold; the Rhodians, however, are versed also in the art of slinging leaden bullets. If, therefore, we should ascertain who among them possess slings, and should not only pay these people for their slings, but likewise pay anyone who is willing to plait new ones, and if, furthermore, we should devise some sort of exemption for the man who will volunteer to serve as a slinger at his appointed post, it may be that men will come forward who will be capable of helping us". This is interesting because Rhodians weren't even hired as slingers, they were hoplites, who happened to have slings and were extremely good at it.

Also in the game type setting wihtin the map selection panel (on the right there is Map | Player | Game type) you can chose a grace period ("ceasefire") for how long you will not be attacked. Finally, in addition to setting AI difficulty to Easy, Very Easy or Sandbox as Boudica suggested, you can also reduce Game Speed on the same Game Type panel (or alternatively from within game using the little clock icon on the left of the top right controls group.

Perhaps variations with or without the 2nd roof? Animations sound very nice too. Don't forget to use the parallax material for those actors with _struct textures (see the rooftiles, for instance).

Maybe even without the lower roof? I could even give them an animation so the presses go up and down all the time

Not in CWA We have greek archers and regular archers, and then Maurya have a bonus due to their long bows and Kush has poision/fire, persia has faster draw time.... Not in CWA We have greek archers and regular archers, and then Maurya have a bonus due to their long bows and Kush has poision/fire, persia has faster draw time....

Since R28, the Mauryas Maidens champions longbows have shorter range. Maybe the logic there is that they are females so weak draw strength? Anyways they do make up for their champion title with better speed and high damage. They also have less hp too thoughts, but overall still a good unit.

Nice, I approve.

If I make a custom decal it could be looking something like this: (using the decal from the spartan barracks and a pine tree decal)

Nice. I like the real windows. I also like the hanging winch.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone @Stan` Changed the layout a little bit. Mod file is attached, please test and let me know what you think? :) 765954859_olive_mill(2).zip

In the first minute really? Have you tried clicking the gear icon next to the AI at the game setup and lowering the difficulty? If you don't want to be attacked at all, start with the Sandbox difficulty, but Very Easy should be slow enough to give you enough time.

One thing 0 A.D. lacks is a diversity of archer types. I think the current ones resemble longbowmen more, but there are no shortbow units. I like the idea of a short-range ranged unit with higher damage than a longbow. Perhaps, in melee, it could fight with a short sword or dagger. I’m not sure how complex its implementation would be. I think it would make sense not to allow tight formations for slingers if we want to add a touch of realism, but limiting slingers to direct line of sight would make them quite useless. Beyond 0 A.D.’s realistic orientation, let’s not forget this is an RTS, not a combat simulator.

Every time i start a skirmish game, the npc attacks me 1 minute in, i couldnt even build barracks but the npc keeps attacking me super early, how do i stop this

I have no idea how formulas work in this game (would like to know though), but along the “simplified realism argument”, I think bonuses should be avoided, they seem to me a sign that the parameters used to reproduce reality are either not enough or are being inefficiently used. I rather have a couple more parameters than who knows how many random bonuses here and there. This keeping in mind that it would be nice to eventually show the relevant info not as a bunch of text like it’s now, but as a given set of icons and values that is as simple and standard as possible. It seems to me that with hack, pierce, crush, block (with a shield), parry (with a weapon) and dodge values, both for attack and defense, most things should be achieved (I don’t see any advantage to organic/metallic armor types, it’s just setting hack/pierce/crush defence values). Also, causing low damage should do very little, as a measure of actual penetration of defenses, to enhance differences, and penalising massing up the wrong kind of counter. Going through some of what has been said, and just as a first approximation: Spearmen: high pierce attack, hard to block, low dodging. Archers: pierce attack, easy to block, basically impossible to parry, hard to dodge. Cavalry: low blocking, high dodging. Maces: high crush attack, hard to block. Axemen: high hack attack, hard to parry. Swordsmen: high hack attack, hard to dodge, high parrying, high blocking if they have a shield. Javelineers: high pierce attack, low crush defense, high dodging. Elephants: very high crush attack, high hack and crush defense, can’t be dodged, can’t dodge. Rams: extremely high crush attack, very high pierce defense, high crush defense, extremely easily dodged, can’t dodge. Buildings: extremely high pierce and hack defense, very high crush defense, can’t dodge. Slingers: high crush attack, low defenses. Slingers should be good against troops that don’t have crush defense, cheap, sling faster and farther than bows (bow damage should decrease more with distance), but have no armor, be unable to form close formations when slinging, should have a straight line of sight (slinging over friendly troops was too risky, iirc), and, most importantly, take a lot of time to train. Regarding their slow demise (they would be around up to the Middle Ages though), certain late agricultural technologies should drastically increase how much their training takes, since they came from a more agrarian background, and besides some early “biconical lead projectiles” tech to increase their pierce damage, they should not be improved much by other techs (around the middle to late timeframe of the game sling technology was historically at its peak, while others kept improving). Going back to unit’s values: archers’ arrows should be somewhat easy to block with shields, they would lose against cavalry, who should lose against spearmen, who should lose against swordsmen (here I wasn’t sure if they should win or lose against archers, I guess it should depend on how much their shield can block). I like the hard to block/parry/dodge dynamic of the mace/axe/sword, going along with the reality that crush damage transfers more through shield and armor, axes are hard to parry, and swords have faster attacks. I have not emulated all possibilities in my head though, all remains to be tested. Javeliners are good against elephants (from a distance), which along rams are good against buildings. It’s a matter of fine tuning to get what one wants, as Enrico Fermi told Freeman Dyson: “with four parameters I can fit an elephant, and with five I can make him wiggle his trunk". No bonuses should be needed!

I work on a similar mod, and I have started with the Mauryas. Some ideas I am testing. Temple can be build on neutral terrain, but does not project a sphere of influence Several new Temple technologies (not necessarily unique to the Maur): Aura around Temples that increase worker gathering and building rate; Temples grants structures +x% territory influence radius Historical reasoning: It is claimed that Ashoka spread Buddhism and interlocking of religion and economics / state Stables and Elephant Stables switch places Historical reasoning: According to sources I have read elephants accounted for about 20% of the empire's "cavalry"; enough to use some leeway to make them gameplay-wise more relevant, and make the Civ more unique Visha Kanya can be trained in the Temple Only trainable after researching a tech? Are one or both of them trainable in P2? If Archer is trainable in P2, P3 tech to increase poison damage Swordwoman has a damage bonus against heroes Still trainable in Palace? Give all Maur heroes an aura that buffs Visha Kanyas? Historical reasoning: According to the folk lore Visha Kanyas were young girls who were administered various poisons and antidotes to make their bodily fluids toxic, and then sent out to assassinate influential targets by being intimate with them

Shameless self-adulation: All changes of the above mod will be in 0.29, btw. Better GUI: You have a better structure overview in the main menu, and it adds more hotkeys. You can also use it to "cheat" if you want to. Haven't tested it, but this seems to be good: This makes the differences between Civilians and Citizens more noticeable, as currently male Civilians and Citizens use the same voice:

French =B

public Litterally, a must-have.