Leaderboard

Hey everyone, I am creating this thread to discuss the balancing from a "meta" perspective in hopes to improve the current situation. Please refrain from discussing "actual" balancing in this thread. As some of you may know, it has been a priority of mine for the past three years to find a way to provide a good experience for players, whether they are on the competitive side or not. For the 24th Alpha I created a Personal Mail (PM) with a few individuals, in order to try to create a team-like cohesion. While the 24th Alpha was a game changer in a lot of ways, and a painful experience, I do believe that it was the most productive in terms of actual patches and changes. People played by the rules by proposing, creating, and accepting patches (I insist on the last part because without formal acceptance there is no liability). I also tried to leverage a documentation team to update the design document. The job was too hard, and it died quickly and in silence. The original design was somewhat different from what the current game is today. There would have been much less civilizations, and instead your empire would have switched from a generic civilization to a more specific one (e.g greek -> macedon -> seleucid). Then another era came, where everything changed. Meanwhile, I was not happy about doing things in the shadows. This whole project is a community effort, and the contributors of today are the ones that might carry the flame when I am gone. So after a few internal discussions we came up with the balancing subforum, where everyone could see what was going on behind the curtains but only a selected few could interract, and anyone could ask me for a seat at the table, with some relevant experience. It came with little titles that hoped would boost morale. However... It did not go as I(we) planned. It created an even bigger split in the community, resulted in a huge variety of threads which is good, but which led nowhere as none of the idea was accepted enough to be implemented. And even the ideas who did get implemented did not make it. While the Personal Mail (PM) did go off track from time to times, it had the advantage of notifying people everytime someone posted (I do not think many people use that forum feature for threads) and I think the discussion was more focused, people pinging each other for patch reviews etc... There was also an attempt to use the chat on Phabricator which also sends emails for each messages, but it quickly vanished after the 24th Alpha. The 25th Alpha got some welcomed changes, at a much slower rate, and I think it fixed a lot of the quirks Alpha 24 introduced. But we're not quite there yet, and I know a few people are hurt about the current state of the game. I'm not a fan of the current balancing forums, and I'd like to merge them again with the rest of the game discussions, or at least to open them, since there seem to be no point in having them closed anymore. So I'm asking everyone, what can we (as in Wildfire Games) do, to get more contributions about balancing, to make A26 a success. We have some very nasty release blockers, and that leaves time for a bit more balancing patches. Best regards, Stan

A finer terrain grid. Water caustics for shallow water. Just use 30 or so frames and roll those on submerged patches with a stencil test on the water plane I guess. Do something to make ships better.

Hello everyone, We're happy to release the first M1 Mac Testing version of 0 A.D. Alpha 25b We provide this in the hope of finding and squashing bugs efficiently. It may however contain bugs. If you choose to test, please keep that in mind. EDIT: Since the bundle is not signed on certain macOS version you might need to unlock the app. You can do so by running the following command. xattr -cr /Applications/0\ A.D..app Download Link Things you may want to test (non-exhaustive) Launch a random game Launch a skirmish. Connect to the lobby Play on the lobby with someone Launch Atlas and try things out there Open Unit tests demo (To see if there any breakage in displaying entity's) (It's in scenarios) Enable feedback and see if it works (Main menu) Video Connect to and use mod.io Test replaying new games Test Screenshots (F2) Test Big Screenshots (Maj+F2) Test hotkeys Test ranked games Test Saving and loading a game. Test Quickload/Quicksave (Optional) Upload the feedback files (See see wiki:GameDataPaths) What to do if I see a weird red line ? Make sure to enable GLSL in the game options. What to do if I have an Out Of Sync? You should go in your logs folder (see wiki:GameDataPaths), find the replay (commands.txt at least), the mainlog/interestinglog and find the OOS dump folder. Zip all these files and upload them here. Ideally, you should coordinate with the OOS players so that they upload their own OOS dump, so we can compare them. What to do if I have an error or notice something weird? Post your commands.txt (replay) and the interestinglog.html file from your folder. You can also reply to this thread. What to do if the game crashes Update your crashlog.dmp and crashlog.txt see wiki:GameDataPaths

Here's my suggested unit balancing/countering paradigm revamp Terminology: Line Unit The base unit for this type (Melee Infantry, Ranged Infantry, Cavalry) Will counter one of the other types in a simple rock-paper-scissors Counter Unit This unit counters other units of its own type. Specialized Unit Breaks the counter methodology in some specialized way. Infantry Spear Line Unit Attack: Medium Armor: Medium Speed: Medium Bonus vs. Cavalry Countered by: Infantry Sword, Infantry Archer Infantry Pike Line Unit Attack: Medium Armor: Medium Speed: Medium Bonus vs. Cavalry "Snare" status effect which very briefly reduces the speed of hit enemy units Countered by: Infantry Sword, Infantry Archer Infantry Sword Counter Unit Attack: High Armor: Low Speed: High Bonus vs. Melee Infantry Countered by: Infantry Archer, Infantry Sword Infantry Archer Line Unit Attack: Medium Armor: Medium Speed: Medium Bonus vs. Infantry Infantry Slinger Counter Unit Attack: Medium Armor: Low Speed: High Bonus vs. Ranged Infantry Countered by: Cavalry Spear Infantry Javelineer Specialized Unit Attack: High Armor: Low Speed: Medium Bonus vs. Ranged Cavalry (incl. Chariots) and War Elephants Countered by: Cavalry Spear Cavalry Spearman Line Unit Attack: Medium Armor: Medium Speed: Medium Bonus vs. Ranged Infantry Countered by: Infantry Spear, Infantry Pike, Cavalry Sword Cavalry Swordsman Counter Unit Attack: Medium Armor: Medium Speed: High Bonus vs. Cavalry Countered by: Infantry Spear, Infantry Pike, Cavalry Sword Cavalry Archer Specialized Unit Attack: Medium Armor: Low Speed: High No bonus, but has a "kiting" effect which frustrates melee units Countered by: Infantry Javelineer, Cavalry Swordsman Cavalry Javelineer Specialized Unit Attack: Medium Armor: Low Speed: High Bonus vs. Support Units (Female Citizens, Traders, Healers) Countered by: Infantry Javelineer, Cavalry Swordsman War Elephant Specialized Unit Attack: High Armor: High Speed: Medium-Low Bonus vs. Cavalry, Gates Splash Hack damage Countered by: Infantry Javelineer, Bolt Shooter "Fear" aura Chariot Mixin for Cavalry Adds +100% health +75% resource cost, +1 pop cost, -10% speed Greater accuracy for the Bowman/Javelineer Bowman/Javelineer can independently target nearby enemies Trample Damage aura Cataphract Mixin for Cavalry Adds +2 hack and +2 pierce armor +50% metal cost, -10% speed Extra attack range, since they use the longer cavalry lance Trample Damage aura Camel Mixin for Cavalry +10% health -10% speed "Stench" aura vs. Horse Cavalry (Reduces Horse Cavalry effectiveness) Axe/Mace Mixin for Sword units +25% metal cost Small Bonus vs. Structures Champions +25% health +25% attack +50% cost Heroes +500% health +200% attack +400% cost Specialized Auras Catapult Buildable in the field by soldiers after constructing an Arsenal, build limit 5 per Arsenal Capturable Attack: High Armor: Medium Speed: Low Bonus vs. Structures, extra bonus vs. Fortress Countered by: Melee Units, Bolt Shooter Battering Ram Trained at the Arsenal; Buildable by soldiers in the field after researching a tech Not Capturable Attack: High Armor: High Speed: Low Bonus vs. Structures, extra bonus vs. Walls and Gates Countered by: Melee Units, Bolt Shooter Bolt Shooter Counter Unit Trained at the Arsenal Capturable Attack: Medium Armor: Low Speed: Low Bonus vs. Siege Engines, Good against Infantry due to having Pierce attack Countered by: Melee Cavalry, other Bolt Shooters Siege Tower Buildable in the field by soldiers after constructing an Arsenal, build limit 1 per Arsenal Not Capturable Attack: Medium Armor: High Speed: Low Capture Bonus vs. Structures, increases for each unit Garrisoned Countered by: Melee Units, Bolt Shooter

Evolution of the economy score Since its introduction, it has remained largely the same, counting everything that is collected; the only notable change is that trading income is also taken into account. function calculateEconomyScore(playerState, index) { let total = 0; // Notice that this skips the vegetarianFood property of resourcesGathered for (let type of g_ResourceData.GetCodes()) total += playerState.sequences.resourcesGathered[type][index]; total += playerState.sequences.tradeIncome[index]; return Math.round(total / 10); } Evolution of the military score rP12914 - Add "score" tab in post-game summary (2/Dec/12) by @quantumstate Related forum threads: feature request: total points in summary page (14/Sep/12) How to show "killed units" counted in resources in post-game Summary? (5/Nov/12) Relevant code: militaryScore.caption = Math.round((playerState.statistics.enemyUnitsKilledValue + playerState.statistics.enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue) / 10); rP18395 - Capture statistics summary (17/Jun/16) by @elexis Related tickets: #3216 - Add capture statistics to summary screen (3/May/15) Relevant code: function calculateMilitaryScore(playerState) { return Math.round((playerState.statistics.enemyUnitsKilledValue + playerState.statistics.enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue + playerState.statistics.buildingsCapturedValue) / 10); } [Last update] rP19584 - Fix economy and military score (15/May/17) by @Imarok Related discussion: D494 - Fix economy and military score (14/May/17) Relevant code: function calculateMilitaryScore(playerState, index) { return Math.round((playerState.sequences.enemyUnitsKilledValue[index] + playerState.sequences.unitsCapturedValue[index] + playerState.sequences.enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue[index] + playerState.sequences.buildingsCapturedValue[index]) / 10); } Explanation calculateMilitaryScore sum of all is values, divided by 10 enemyUnitsKilledValue the sum cost of the unit that gets killed e.g. a Ptolemies Pikeman: 50 wood, 50 food = 100 points there is no difference between killing a unit costing 50 food or 50 metal, the points you get are the same unitsCapturedValue Units are uncapturable, this value is always zero enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue similar to enemyUnitsKilledValue e.g. Ptolemies Barracks: 200 wood, 100 stone = 300 points buildingsCapturedValue each building has a capture value, as soon as you capture a building completely, you receive points for the costs of this building, partial captures are not taken into account e.g. Ptolemies Storehouse: 40 wood = 40 points Steps to change any score Thread/ ticket with discussion Propose a formulae, get the consensus of some well respected players Make a patch or ping me to make a patch Some variables that can easily be used for a new formulae can be found in the StatisticsTracker.js file. If you need a new value it would need to be created e.g. D4224 - Total idle time. It's better to keep it simple, because that increases the likelihood that change will actually happen. "unitsTrained": this.unitsTrained, "unitsLost": this.unitsLost, "unitsLostValue": this.unitsLostValue, "enemyUnitsKilled": this.enemyUnitsKilled, "enemyUnitsKilledValue": this.enemyUnitsKilledValue, "unitsCaptured": this.unitsCaptured, "unitsCapturedValue": this.unitsCapturedValue, "buildingsConstructed": this.buildingsConstructed, "buildingsLost": this.buildingsLost, "buildingsLostValue": this.buildingsLostValue, "enemyBuildingsDestroyed": this.enemyBuildingsDestroyed, "enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue": this.enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue, "buildingsCaptured": this.buildingsCaptured, "buildingsCapturedValue": this.buildingsCapturedValue, "resourcesCount": this.GetResourceCounts(), "resourcesGathered": this.resourcesGathered, "resourcesUsed": this.resourcesUsed, "resourcesSold": this.resourcesSold, "resourcesBought": this.resourcesBought, "tributesSent": this.tributesSent, "tributesReceived": this.tributesReceived, "tradeIncome": this.tradeIncome, "treasuresCollected": this.treasuresCollected, "lootCollected": this.lootCollected, "populationCount": this.GetPopulationCount(), "percentMapExplored": this.GetPercentMapExplored(), "teamPercentMapExplored": this.GetTeamPercentMapExplored(), "percentMapControlled": this.GetPercentMapControlled(), "teamPercentMapControlled": this.GetTeamPercentMapControlled(), "peakPercentMapControlled": this.peakPercentMapControlled, "teamPeakPercentMapControlled": this.teamPeakPercentMapControlled, "successfulBribes": this.successfulBribes, "failedBribes": this.failedBribes

You can't do it through the interface, however you should be able to garrison them by running the simulation, then saving the map while it's still running

Do you think it would be a good idea to open a ticket for this enchantment?

Wondering how many frames per hour UE5 might give for our average hardware

Perhaps when there is a situation that calls for a vote, the vote can be mandatory for "Balancing Advisors" (perhaps with a reminder sent by forum message) and optional for others. Most votes on balancing discussions I have seen have very low participation. An example of a vote could stem from something people broadly agree on, for example: CS archer inf need a buff, vote for one of the following: return accuracy values to a24 add 1 or more pierce damage give them 1 pierce armor

tributes received could be taken out someone's eco score. it would make sense I think, and it wouldn't be that big of a change, but I guess it's also ok to not count tributes, scores can't be perfect anyway.

Without moderation it won't work as a recent example showed because after all everything is about balancing, no need for any other forum. Looking at @Gurken Khan Honestly I don't mind a closed group as long as no one pretends it was discussed openly, either it's fully open or it's not. And yes, in the latter case I can't be bothered to participate. Balancing is also given far to much weight, broken packing of catas is far worse than the discussed balancing issues when it comes to retaining users. Any new user with a 4k screen will hardly stick around long enough to find the gui.scale property. The list of potential show stoppers is long. New features are a 100 times worse than fixing existing ones. About multiplayer, the lobby climate I consider most important and that seems to be a major issue currently. As for balancing, without proper statistics or at least some quality questionnaires, it's a headless chicken. Add to that that balancing, realism and game play may have contradictory goals and there is no clear statement / moderation line what has precedence. Also balance isn't any worse than other similar titles. We just have to accept that fixing only game breaking issues (for instance deathballs like roman scorpios in the past) is plenty good enough. Honestly, I'd just replace the whole balancing effort with a balancing tech, as balancing is an e-sport here, we need more than 1 vector so those folks don't have it to easy. Let's say one roughly corresponding to the 3 base strategies, boom, turtle, rush. If for example a civ has a to strong an eco, just reduce the eco factor and so forth. Then anything not about tweaking those 3 factors is by definition not balancing at all.

quite the opposite: if someone is efficient at gathering, he will spend everything, redundancy and efficiency are contrary. also wasteful players will have low returns from their eco investements and will have lower eco scores in the end. tributes should better count as spent though.

So a wasteful player would get a higher score, while players being efficient at gathering would get a lower score. Do tributes even count towards resources spent?

I would much prefer if the K/D statistic is left alone and you just add other stats as you feel inclined, it is very satisfying ending a game with a good K/D, even if one has lost. Its also very funny knowing that perfection is achieving a K/D ratio of infinity.

The release will come when the release blockers are fixed.

K/D ratio does depend on tactics employed by the player. Someone who gets bogged down in a war of attrition with a player who can trade well is going to have a different K/D to someone who can just run over an opponent without any opposition. It is possible to overwhelm and win by sheer numbers just as much as it is possible to annihilate an opponent with minimal losses in pitched battles.

yes :O

For me this comes back to the problem that it's hard to define what 'balancing' is and that there is no definite feature/ gameplay-design plan. Everyone comes in with different ideas of how they would want the game to look and play like and no consensus in any form is ever reached. So is this a discussion about e.g. skirmishers need -1 hack or about hard vs soft counter or about how different civs should play and how the grand gameplay works? Without a having a defined goal of what the balancing discussion should lead to, it's hard to discuss it.

Should this be published on the main website as well ?

Anyone wanna help ? @wowgetoffyourcellphone could you reflect your art changes there ?

I will mention that other games, such as Battle for Middle Earth 2, have audio cues when different types of enemy units come into view. "They have a cave troll!" things like that.

I mean value ratio.

At the very least, I think this should be the case for eco and building bonus heroes, like Pericles (Athenians), Xerxes (Persians), Britomaros (Gauls), and Ashoka the Great (Mauryans). It would tempt more people to make them. Well, maybe not Pericles so much, but...anyways. I don't understand why Ptols and Seleucids only should have this bonus in terms of balance.

That seems fair enough. You might be right about that. My thought on it was that the 375/100 player was probably doing the most strategic damage, while the 400/350 player was more of a team meat shield. But there could be situations where the 400 kills player was the better player.

I think the player killing the 400 enemies performs better. Strength is how much trouble your opponents can throw while they are still unable to take you out.

You must remember that, he expresses himself in his language and that he is from a different culture.

Call it melee and ranged, I don't care. It's only a thought exercise. My point was to just simplify cav and inf into melee (heavy in my first example) and ranged (light), 4 classes, and then balance from there instead of the current 10+ classes.

Take the Cavalry Spearman and add the Chariot mixin. It's what mixins are for, to mix and match traits with different classes of units.

I find this topic very interesting, and the information you are gathering about the Minoan culture are fascinating. I would be pleased to be able to play with such faction you are building. But I have a general comment about these posts: I am always surprised by what might be shocking people or not. You are just talking about some breasts, and more specifically, some breast on a very little 3D model, hypothesizing it might shock some people. Let's talk about war, murders, factions of people killing other people. Well it is not so shocking, actually, we could even make a game from this and have lots of fun by killing people, taking soldiers to murder villagers. We can see it from a distant sight and still have fun by playing. But some breasts ? Well we might add some install option to block this content... Even if you remove blood, the game is still about war and murder. In my point of view it is much more shocking than a little model of woman with traditional clothes from the age bronze revealing her breast. Especially for a game with such an ambitious objective, trying to fit the historical reality as close as possible (from what we know). You can have men half nude, but not women with breasts out, too shocking. We are all humans, there is nothing shocking in some nudity, especially if it is a traditional outfit from ancient ages. Talking about children or young people, I find much more shocking that they could be exposed in a continuous flow of violence in games (not specifically this one), movies etc., than they might *barely see* some breast. Even if the model is really realistic, and you can zoom, etc.. In the end there is absolutely nothing sexual in this kind of content. It is just nature and history. I understand cultures are different among people, and what might shock somebody might be totally meaningless and not even noticeable for others, depending on traditions, etc. I don't say I hold the truth, but I just wanted to share my point of view, to make you have a more relative point of view about this specific question. And in the end, if we can respect other cultures and tradition, we could also respect some ancient bronze-age way of clothing