Jump to content


Community Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


causative last won the day on March 8

causative had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

193 Excellent


About causative

  • Rank
  1. A23 balance done?

    They might actually be easier to mass in a23 because the main practical counter to mass cavalry archers in a22, is mass cavalry skirmishers, and cavalry skirmishers have the accuracy nerf. Armor is a percentage decrease in damage, 10% per point. 100 hp with 8 pierce armor is the same as 100 / (.9)^8 = 232 hp with 0 pierce armor.
  2. A23 balance done?

    I think mass cavalry archers might still be OP in a23. The HP and cost nerfs are significant but once you have 100 horse archers or camels I think you can still kill anything else. Except maybe mass spear cavalry. Or of course siege towers/bolt shooters/rams.
  3. Those rules are only for rated 1v1. 2v2 games are not rated so there is no rule against leaving.
  4. Redesign Rams

    It would be nice if there were different varieties of rams. From just a bare small tree trunk you can make in age II for 100 wood, to a huge armored ram with a turret. I think that rams should be captured more often than they are destroyed. If you have superior force in an area, you can slaughter the occupants of the ram and take it for yourself. If you haven't done that, it's extremely difficult to destroy the ram, and if you have done it, why destroy what is now yours?
  5. Redesign Rams

    This was because, in a siege, the entrenched enemy normally had no business on the ground at all. The safety of the walls was too great an advantage to sacrifice. I don't think this detracts from the tank motif. Certainly, modern-day tanks are used to provide covering fire at fortified enemies, as well as to use their main guns to break the fortifications, just as a ram can do. The fact remains that a battering ram was an enormous structure, difficult to dismantle. Its main weapon was a tree trunk that could be up to 30 yards long. It should not be fragile. Enemies countered rams by throwing boulders at them, trying (and often failing) to burn them, entangling their wheels with chains, pouring water on the ground in front of them to mire them, digging under them, trying to grab and lift them with hooks suspended from the walls. They used this variety of tactics because simply wrecking the ram by hand was no easy task. Running out and just hacking a ram apart with swords and axes was not a tactic I have read about. If you think tanks should be so vulnerable to this tactic, where was it used?
  6. Redesign Rams

    In fact, rams were used against people. That's because the distinction between "siege ram" and "siege tower" was not always a clear one. The Assyrian siege ram 3d model that the Persians use in 0ad, for example, is based on this historical ram. The image shows an elevated platform, above the ram itself, whose purpose was for a few guys to stand on and shoot arrows from, while being protected against return fire. Very much like a tank. I recently read about how the Huns used a dozen such rams with protected archers on top to capture a town. It's not true that oil and fire could easily destroy covered rams. The rams would be covered in wet animal skins to prevent it from catching fire and prevent oil or boiling water from penetrating to the people inside.
  7. Redesign Rams

    A ram should take much longer to kill than infantry, because in real life, it takes just a second to stab a soldier in the face, and probably at least half an hour for a dozen men to thoroughly dismantle an undefended ram. Rams should "feel" substantial and imposing to the player. They were not historically glass cannons at all. They were the ancient equivalent of tanks, serving not only to damage the gates and walls but also to render its garrison invulnerable against arrows and boulders thrown down on it as it advances.
  8. Redesign Rams

    They should not attack biological units, only structures and other siege. They weren't fragile. Covered siege rams weighed multiple tons and were covered in armor, with dozens of men inside to move and protect them. They would be extremely difficult to destroy outright. You can't just chop up a massive tree trunk or its heavy wooden frame with swords in the middle of a battle. If you've ever tried to cut down even a small tree with an axe - it takes a few minutes! But it barely takes a second for the enemy to stab and kill you while you're doing that. The most vulnerable thing about a covered ram would be the ropes to suspend the ram, but if you just run up and cut the ropes and run away, the ram itself is not destroyed and can be easily repaired. A ram can be compared to a ship - both are large, mobile, wooden structures very difficult to take down during a melee. Capturing is a different story. Rams should be capturable. Speed - rams in-game are already unwieldy due to their size which makes it hard to get them where they need to go, especially if units are in the way. I don't see a need to reduce their speed further. From a realism perspective they could be slower, but from a game balance perspective it's not necessary.
  9. Attack stats

    These are what I would consider "balance goals." Variety of strategies within each civilization: each civilization should allow several equally powerful unit compositions at different stages of the game. Players shouldn't be thinking, "OK, I'm Seleucid, therefore I will always mass horse archers." There should be suspense about what your opponent is doing. Variety of civilizations: different civilizations should have meaningfully different unit compositions and strategies. Balance between civilizations: all civilizations should be roughly equal strength. There shouldn't be any unit that's so powerful the dominant strategy is to just mass large amounts of that unit. Armies should be most cost-effective when they have a mix of units. There shouldn't be any unit that's so weak or expensive that it's not worth building. Every unit should have a use in some situations. Reward player skill: an easy-to-play strategy should not defeat a strategy that takes a lot of effort and micro The game should be true to history to the extent possible while still having a fun game. Good unit compositions should be the kind of unit compositions that those historic civilizations used.
  10. Just a random thought: Greek city states fought each other mostly over arable farmland. We see fights over mines and trees in 0ad, but not farmland. It would be interesting to have a mod or perhaps a map that disables the building of farms and corrals, and has gaia farms scattered all around the map that can be captured but not damaged. A player's first CC could have only 3 gaia farms within its range. So, there would be battles to claim more farms.
  11. Attack stats

    Take into account that ranged units often miss; they do less average damage per attack than the number stated. It seems to me that melee units do typically kill things significantly faster than ranged units, if they are already in melee range. An issue with low HP high damage melee units is that melee infantry in 0ad are also slow. With low HP they would have a lot more difficulty walking up to attack a ranged unit. Perhaps melee infantry should receive a "charge" ability or upgrade that lets them charge/sprint at the enemy over short distances. But do consider realism. An armored hoplite is certainly going to be slower than an unarmored guy. The historic advantage of hoplites against skirmishers was that the skirmishers just couldn't do enough damage against their armor, and also once the hoplites met with the enemy, the skirmishers had to stop shooting because of friendly fire.
  12. Lagging when using Shift- modifier key

    It might have been someone else. I don't use windows myself. The only vaguely related thing I could find in my IRC logs is that Windows does not prevent alt+tab from reaching the application - so alt+tab will toggle status bars - and Linux does.
  13. Athenians have champion infantry archers so perhaps you would like to play Athenians. Or you could go with Seleucids for the horse archers. Infantry archers don't do that well against massed enemy cavalry, though. They will also lose ground against spearmen/skirmishers unless the army sizes are very large. Archers do best when you can keep attacking at long range and retreating behind your defenses when the enemy starts to chase.
  14. 0ad is the LinuxQuestions.org Open Source game of the year! LinuxQuestions Members Choice results page LinuxQuestions winners thread zdnet article about the LinuxQuestions awards
  15. Mouse\Camera Controls

    I don't know what you mean by "spectrum panning" but you can rotate the view with ctrl-a ctrl-d ctrl-w and ctrl-s. (You can see all camera hotkeys in the default.cfg file mentioned in the settings manual I linked). The middle mouse button works (or should work) like this: click and hold with the middle mouse button, and move the mouse around. The view should pan as you move the mouse. By the way, you can also control the default camera speed and angle. I find the default speed is too slow. I also prefer an overhead view because it helps me to judge distance, although perhaps it's not as aesthetically pleasing. I use these camera settings in my local.cfg: [view] ; Camera control settings scroll.speed = 300.0 zoom.default=200.0 fov = 45.0 rotate.x.default = 60.0 rotate.y.speed = 5.0 The way I use the camera, I hardly ever rotate the view if I'm not spectating. I just use wasd to move it around, or I click on the minimap for long-distance camera changes, or I press f to focus on a selected unit. I don't use middle button scrolling either.