Leaderboard

As a basic principle, I think it would be good if basic defenses used in P1 looses efficiency as the game progresses. In a23, increase in units HP when phasing up helped to fulfill this purpose. All units were buffed with the change in phases but towers weren't, so they be less effective at killing units. I agree. For palisades, the application of this principle I mentioned was, and still is missing. Palisades are often misused currently since they shouldn't be useful to block sieges but mostly be useful in early game. The idea of a tech available in p2/p3 to allow fast destruction of palisades seems good. A tech that could allow units to destroy extremely fast palisades in late game would work well, especially against palisades spam. So if someone used palisades in early game, he has to replace them by walls to have defenses in late game. Walls are barely used currently. Some players build palisades around them to solve that problem. In a24 (slower training time of units, no hp increase when phasing up), there is a very weak timing in multiplayers (smaller distance to the enemy) when you transition from P1 to P2. You spent a lot of resources and lose some training time from your cc to phase up so a player P1 is often stronger than a player that just reached P2. I have tried a few all-in with 4 to 6 barracks while P1 when the enemy reached P2, they seem currently quite strong. You start fighting with a population lead and usually, the enemy is unable to replace units dying fast enough even if he receives extra resources because he will lack production buildings. If on top of that you remove towers usage when they are upgraded, this weakness is even reinforced. I might limit cc's additional arrows to 10 maximum instead of 20 but keep a garrison capacity of 20. This would not change much the cc's role in early game but it would reduce its defensive usage in late game.

Made them bigger and added a decal.

Because @Freagarach is not into competitive gameplay, at all. And sadly what makes sense for competitive gameplay doesn't always make sense for the other players.

For blocking projectiles: Well, one can still shoot over walls and palisades if one wants to. Main point is to prevent units from freely walking into the settlement/town and to give defenders some time to react. But yes, would be nice, its just performance nightmare

And please note that making projectiles always land (i.e. making them cruise missiles) can be considered terrible gameplay downsides as well. (_At least_ by me and other people I play with.)

The reason to spam palisades is to ruin pathfinders and limit movement of the enemy and make rams spend eternity taking them down. The power in palisades is not health of the barrier, that much I can say for sure. In a23 people had no extra time to sit and build defenses anyway, the game was much more dynamic. Usually only a few strings of walls. Only exception being the roman siege spam, which was a rare tactic and even rarer to succeed. @Dizaka surely you can explain this you are an expert in palisades

Looking at images of such palisade walls, I get the impression that it would not take many strikes from a ram to take them down. Also, wood has leasst strength in shear with respect to the grain. This is the situation of 0ad palisades. If there are no horizontal stabilizers to keep the vertical logs in position then 2 things happen: the absence of one log allows surrounding logs to move more, creating more instability the impact of a ram is not distributed, meaning only one or two pieces of wood takes the whole load of the ram strike. This is enough to justify halving the crush armor of palisades, A ram should probably be able to breach it in 2 strikes. This discussion of historical accuracy and engineering limitations is pretty pointless for these palisades as they are just art-pieces for a game mechanism. We should free ourselves from this thinking, and let us make the palisade walls perform a logical, fun, and varied function in 0ad based off of a gameplay point of view. lets ask these questions: How much do we want small fragments of un-destroyed palisades to just sit and clutter the map and cause bad pathfinding? How effective should spamming multiple layers of palisades be in multiplying the strength of the overall barricade? How does it affect gameplay movement, fluidity, and decisions? I think the answers to these questions can be found in area damage, cost, and build time.

I tested Dakara's & Yekaterina's proposal in my sandbox. My findings: Javelinist attack to 32 P, speed 2.000, range 20 -- Good changes IMO. Slower attack means units no longer look like they are having seizures! 32 attack hits like a truck, but doesn't seem game breaking. 20 base range might be a little short. It definitely underlines the idea that these guys are not just off-brand archers, which is good. Less good is that they almost feel like weird melee-infantry with such short range. 25 may be a better compromise number. 25 +5 range per rank would sweeten the deal IMO. Javelinist HP to 75 -- Way overpowered! 75 HP javs annihilate archers, and every other unit type I tested them against. That's way too much meat. If the intent is to make javelins tanky, without massively changing their role, I'd suggest a different idea... Javelinist armor to 5 H, 2 P (which is +4 H, +1 P compared to their current) -- I think this is much more in line with the visual depiction of their gear. Those small light shields would not be so great against projectiles, but they would be excellent for parrying sword and spear strikes. I think the balance effect is better too. In combination with Dakara's changes, these javelinists have a strong anti-melee flavor, both as a tank for other ranged units and as a DPS source in themselves. This seems to have been the intent with their base stats as well, but now it is accentuated. And against archers they still lose by a respectable margin, which I think is right.

Los edificios aún no tienen decoración porque todavía sigo con la investigación sobre utensilios , armas y otros materiales históricamente y estéticamente correctos (con sus colores y formas correctos) Disculpe las molestias*

Okay, so it would be over my dead body. I have an idea that might work, without much extra work.

Note that you can do exactly the same with stone walls. I've seen some crazy wall design over the years That's no so hard. Just edit binaries\data\mods\public\simulation\templates\template_structure_defensive_palisade.xml and add: <DeathDamage> <Shape>Circular</Shape> <Range>30</Range> <FriendlyFire>true</FriendlyFire> <Damage> <Crush>600</Crush> </Damage> </DeathDamage> Note this will damage everything around it. (units, buildings etc.)

One could try adding area damage to rams, to see how that affects mass palisades.

They're main use should be blocking projectiles imo. Same goes for stone walls, but because stone walls are higher they should also block cata projectiles. Currently this doesn't work but hopefully in the future. As a secondary feature; yes, they should be exactly that:

Personally I prefer having some spread. Consider projectile mass, drag coefficient, kinetic energy of projectile at launch point... Arrows are lighter, so they fly faster but also experienced more air resistance. Stones have smaller kinetic energy but large mass + not really affected by air resistance.

.antipalisade.zip This is the mod: Melee infantry have 5x hard counter against palisade Champions have 10x hard counter Rams have 5x hard counter (can knock out palisade in one hit if you researched the crush upgrade) Test it and see if any other changes are wanted

Hello, i test the mod tonigh . Maybe we have to nerf a little unit big range like arrow and slingers for balance.

Right. IMHO foundations should be invisible to other players until the owning player starts building it.

Could foundations be made invisible to other players? I always liked that approach better.

This mod incorporates structure tree changes proposed by our historian @Thorfinn the Shallow Minded: 1. Athenians can build gym since phase 2 and train champions from it, complemented by a marathon tech to speed up champions. 2. Spartans can build Military Mess Hall in phase 2 and train the champion spearman from it. 3. Macedonians can build siege workshop in phase 2 then train siege tower and crossbow from it 4. Macedonians have access to Hetairos Companion Cavalry since phase 2. 5. Sparta and Rome get new allied slinger unit. 6. Athenians can train phase 2 champions from gym and after unlocking Iphicratean reform, marines can also be trained from the gym. 7. Romans can train Socii Slingers and Socii javelin cavalry from the new Socii Auxiliary camp, available since town phase. 8. Iberians get an unique Soliferreum elite champion javelineer unit. Newest update: compatible with A25 Git link: https://github.com/Yekaterina999/Thorfinn-Balancing-mod thorfinn.zip

Anti-Ranged as their general role. Anti-Elephant and Chariot as their niche role.

Might want to look at the commit which introduced it

The right approach to that question is perhaps to look at the different possible variables at play. Namely, there is defence, damage per second, mobility, and range. All of these are then considered in relation to the cost and necessary training time of the said unit. Fortunately those last variables are constant in most cases. Generally speaking a unit should be able be decent with two of those categories to be potentially worthwhile. Honestly the difference between archers and slingers is more or less a false dichotomy; they had similar roles. It's trying to figure out a niche for the skirmisher that is a bit tougher since their lack of good range, defence, and mobility make their high damage output harder make use of.

I have a post for you...

About the visibility problem: @Langbartcreated this mod:

@GrapjasI would rather play the normal game, and I already like A24 a lot. Again, that was an idea I wanted to put on paper but based on multiple comments I now believe it is not the ideal solution. I can also see that it would remove some of the uniqueness of 0AD , so it seems that we need to find another angle to tackle this

That's actually the problem. The cost-utility is low. That is, the utility of palisades is so great, because of their low cost, that it's frustrating when allies don't build them and get overwhelmed. The problem summarized: Weak players fail to utilize palisades while strong players overuse them as they know their utility. Also, palisades are "short" between the "towers." I think they should be longer and the "towers" farther apart thereby if one "wall" is killed more units can fit through. Palisades decide games, tbh.

If I was attacking, I would hate this because I can't push as quickly as I can. If I was defending, I am very happy to see this because the attacking troops are stuck there, during which time they take more arrow hits from my cc and towers. Trapped rams also give me more time to train swordsmen and reinforce. So I guess there isn't a binary answer to your question. Multiple layers should be more effective, logically. The builder obviously has invested a lot of wood into building this stuff, so the outcome should be better than just one row. In A24, it would make more sense to build a stone wall instead because stone is quite useless and much more efficient in defending your base from siege attacks, whereas you can use the wood to spam more troops or build more barracks. To prevent spam we can increase the cost of these palisade walls, so that they are less cost-efficient than stone walls.

Because unless javelinists are good for something, no one will ever make 40 skirmishers, and thus whether 30 spear cav can beat them or not will be irrelevant.

(but I was making a joke)

Hi, give Skirmisher infantry and cavalry +5m range for rank 2 and +10m (from base value) range for rank 3.

In the long term, what about a "resource hotkey" which toggles between normal view mode and a "resource view mode" where resources are highlighted? That would combine both realism and visibility...

Feel free to adapt the tutorials, make more. I'll see what we can do, but no promises AOM AOE 0 A.D.: Empire Ascendant

(LetswaveaBook and Yekaterina with the ninja!) Yeah, after some thought, I guess you are right. Just put a binary override onto the collision test of MissileHit() in DelayedDamage.js. Best practice would probably be to add an "always hit" tag to ranged weapons that would control this behavior. That way, if for instance someone wanted to make a Myth style total conversion using the game assets, they would have an easy time re-enabling projectile simulation. I don't think updating the visualizations is really necessary. Individual projectiles are hard to see anyway, and clear misses should be pretty rare if projectile speeds are fast enough. It would be much weirder to see arrows bending to track their targets.

Yes, familiar with most of those - looking to retweet and share a few on the Social media platforms shortly, especially that last one - I've had contact with him in the context of my Youtube channel, he's really sound guy and is pretty taken with 0AD.

I think it is a very good idea to increase the damage of melee infantry and siege weapos for palisades ,but.... What about elephants then? Many people build very elongated palisades to protect defensive towers or fortresses (in line with what was said about them being used as an equivalent to defensive stone walls) and it should be noted that while arrows from those buildings hardly affect rams, catapults and siege towers, they do affect elephants. If those siege weapons have a plus for defeating palisades, so should elephants. I do this thinking of a civilization like the Maurians, which I think and from what I have seen relies especially on elephants for siege, since it has elephantry since P2 and cannot build the siege workshop until P3. I know it's an OP civilization right now, but be careful that the new balance improvements don't render it practically useless as it was in A23.

Just make it so that when one palisade is destroyed, all palisades within a radius are destroyed as well, there problem solved

I have an idea: add a P3 tech in the siege workshop which gives rams/siege weapons hard counter against palisades. Or I can even add it by default. Units shouldn't be able to hack down palisades easily because palisades are still quite thick and strong compared to human arms.

[Usual disclaimer that 'WFG' is not a thing and this is just a bunch of people giving some of their free time] We don't have particular plans to address this, mostly because the people currently active are mostly devs who work on other things. That being said, we are stretched rather thin in terms of lobby moderators. It would make sense to have more, but as usual things aren't so simple, because giving moderator power to people implies trusting them, which implies knowing them somewhat.

I think if this is done, then upgrading should be a little faster.

Hi, The subject of mercenaries is complex but brings an undeniable charm to combat and resource management. Proposal: Differentiate between mercenaries and citizen-soldiers. This disturbs me personally but I think these proposals can give them their expected differentiation -> An identity. Players who use it want to do battle with their opponents, either by quickly supporting an ongoing fight or by massing a beautiful, powerful army. A lot of buff and debuff ! Buff : 1-training time 2 seconds, almost instant. It is already an invaluable force. 2-No rank system, the unit is already experienced in combat. The technology for the mercenary rank is to be removed.We avoid having mercenaries who are almost stronger than a champion and we do without unnecessary rank management. 3-Stats generally higher than citizen-soldiers and lower than champions. Current rank 2 equivalent. 4-A loot bonus of 10% (it's slight but to reward the good use of these mercenaries and to affirm the difference between citizens and mercenaries. Warning, 10% of 1 ressource = ? = care. Debuff : 5-No harvest, no construction, always the possibility of repairing. 6-A low cost of food and a high cost of metal. The current cost +5 METAL and 10 for CAV provided the METAL ISSUE is solved. If players get into the habit of mining 2 metal with less wood or food harvester. So with mercenary strategy is a little different economy. METAL ISSUE : I have already spoken about it in another subject. Badosu work for more balance map, more number of METAL spot, but i like really random for avoid the system of build order like age of empire. It my opinion. But all agree for more METAL spot on map i think. Maybe we can have 2 options in lobby for random map: LOW METAL MAP AND METAL MAP NORMAL (like now+more metal spot on map). But also a new technology which increases the efficiency of the collection -> With a mine of 1000 we can collect 2000 metal with a tech in the warehouse. This means that the speed is not increased but that in the long term we will have more Metal. Others more original bulk idea: 7-This is not my delirium but I submit it to the debate, we can also imagine that the mercenaries would be recruited for a limited period, for example 5 minutes, increased to 7 in the presence of tech or heroes and would be overpowered (like champions but at the cost of a mercenaries), you get the idea? 8-Mercenary units can be given to allies. This is not a big buff or debuff but it can have a strategic aspect in team play. 11-The recruited units don't pop into the building but come from the edges of the maps ... (yeah I know it's crazy ...), both a buff and a debuff, it depends on the situation. Allows you to rush more easily for example. But who choose the position clock ?? 12-Recruitment is different. not one unit at a time but in groups of 10. A single group of the same type of unit of living mercenaries can be recruited at a time. It would only cost resources and training time of 20 seconds. Advantage: Does not cost population, units do not sleep in your houses. 12bis- We can see further with proposition 12. In this group there is an additional unit, a kind of mercernary half-hero. 500 HP which brings a military aura 20 yards around it. Increase the cost of Metal +150 compared to proposal 12. 12bis-bis Siege group made up of several soldiers (around 10) and 1 powerful siege weapon. A group quickly ready for attack with a metal cost. 13- Mercenary same cost as now but they have all upgrade because they have own gear.All uprage do not apply to them. So if you rush METAL ECO you don't need blackmisth upgrade. Really strong.

I like @Grapjas idea of showing the vision of multiple units (I suggest 5) at the same time (with all units included, not only traders). There could be some preference for units moving towards your positions. Instead of increased cost for each use I would suggest a count down - it takes some time to get useful information from the other side. The count down could either be between the bribes or (may be better) it could even take some time to get the intel ready (you pay now and after 30 seconds you get a one minute window to use the vision). Moreover, it IHMO better corresponds to the rest of the game, technologies take time to investigate, citizens take time to train.

they should create their own lists.

@user1 maybe a fix for A25? still unsure why saying "I played @#&#036;% that match" gets you muted/kicked yet a literal player named nazi exists and is online as I write this (amongst other ethno nationalist garbage in the lobby chat)

I think intel might be the least beneficial in village phase, while also it would be less realistic for a village to pull off an espionage mission as for a city. As proposed by others above, increasing the cost for each use might be the better solution.

Because it would result in a 2/3 chance that you see something worthless since is about the chance of seeing either women around a CC or an army that you are already fighting. As opposed to now when you get a 100% chance of seeing something useful that you won't intuitively know (i.e. traders and whatever they walk by which could be useful and isn't likely to where the fight is or the farmers). It should be given a buff because no one uses it now. But spending units to see a woman farming isn't a buff.

I don't see how extending it to all support units is a nerf, when before all you'd be able to see is the position of some trade routes and whatever the trader happened to be walking by. At least if you extend it to all support units you could see the position of his key mining operation or something to that effect (in DE, bribery is possible for all Support units and Citizen Soldiers). You can use bribery multiple times as long as you can afford it and get multiple bribed units feeding you vision. It's not supposed to be some big game changing effect. Just possibly give you some actionable intel. If the first bribe doesn't give you much, bribe again. Maybe it's currently too expensive for that, and cost needs looked at in conjunction.

.....idiot anyways, WFG can you comment with a generic "we're working on this" or preferably just do something about it?

he is a rapper and calls himself nibbadick. whats the issue?

@user1 can be something done about it?