Leaderboard

Missed the last presentation about 0 A.D. with a focus on how to contribute ? Fear not for it's now available online: https://t.co/NwcJbyh9Nv

If you look at pure stats, infantry mercs are no less OP than cavalry mercs. However, no-one ever complains about them, simply because it's easy to dodge them, then lure them into a trap due to the slow speed of infantry. The lower survivability of infantry and their slow speed nerf them, making very OP units defeatable. Consider Macedonian silver shield units and champion pikemen. They are just as deadly as the champion cavalry in close range, yet no-one notices them, simply because you are never forced into a melee fight with them: free draw a circle of ranged units around them, then dance with your melee. This will eventually wear out the champion units without costing a single soldier of yours. You can't avoid any cavalry unit using this technique, especially against the Carthaginians (lightening general hero). So an effective nerf would be slowing down these mercenary sword cavalry so that they cannot escape spear cavalry or javlin cavalry.

I’d prefer it only be CS. I have concerns that that’ll make champ spear cav OP, especially because there is a tech for champ spear cav with Sele and Persia.

The problem with the bribe mechanic is that it was implemented and then boom, no one worked on making it more interesting. There were some minor tweaks, sure. But any further design work on the feature died due to disagreements. For instance, I'd expand it to include all support and citizen soldier units and then give it some kind of cool down time between bribes, or make the cost of bribing increase exponentially while there are active spies, but the cost settles back down once all spies are expired. But consensus wasn't reached so now the feature sits unused and unimportant.

My minimap patch isn't a feature, it's an optimization. And according to the open RB list I have some time to make a proper patch.

https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4506 people just can’t agree. If nothing else, I think the 2x multiplier should be implemented since there is agreement in that

Its a trade off, and you would not turn all your pikes into rams anyhow, that would be a grave error in judgment

A sensible player would work with that and try to channel the opponent into crossfire and other disadvantageous situations. If you want to encourage players to think beyond P3 = Ram= victory then you need to give them more options and better ones. That is reasonable

To clarify on the gate weakness I mean that the weakness of gates be further emphasized than they currently are.

So I have been thinking, and I am going to suggest raising the health of stone walls. Right now they are useless except to deter raiding. However I also think gates should be kept at a weak level. This way you leave the obvious weaknesses of walls open while also allowing defending players to better control the flow of an assault on their town. I do not think the stone cost should be altered or the build time.

No I meant for all foot units to turn them into rams. You could also turn that handheld ram into a bigger ram

You could have an upgrade cost for units a bit higher and not require multiple ones. I don't think you can do a shared upgrade that way.

there is another option: soldiers building rams on the field. wow has the code for it if I remember well.

Alrighty, that makes sense

It would be nice if there was a runaway option whenever charging is implemented. Otherwise, it will be all offense and no defense.

Even if there is no new model it doesn't hinder the adjustment of the data, I suggest you try my mod, there is a battering ram in P2, it is cheaper, has lower HP and damage, and is easier to be destroyed by melee infantry.

wiki/XML.Actor#AttachPoint Loading the mesh in blender give a nice list.

More seriously, there are only three phases not four. So a light ram in second phase would make it far more meaningful than the current "everyone rush phase 3 as fast they jolly well can" I don't see why everyone should not get a tree trunk hauled by a couple guys. It does not take a rocket scientist to tell a couple guys to pick up a random log and start smacking the local neighbor's door with it. The difference would be much lower pierce lower since they are just a couple guys with a log, so shooting them would be just as effective as smacking them with pointy sticks and swords.

@Stan` This is really well done presentation. Excellent travail.

All know cavalry (CAV) mercenaries (MERC) in a25 are over powered (OP). But how is that? I felt like people didn't get to the point why this is so and far more important for balancing you would need some quantity to do the right adjustment. However, this comment is not the guide to perfect balancing of MERC CAV it just shall give the numbers to do a good balancing. Additionally, it compares MERC INF with MERC CAV which was not done so far, but I really believe its necessary. My first simplest thought was, MERC infantry (INF) cost 60 metal (ME) and in relation to the costs of citizen soldiers (CS) MERC CAV should cost 90 ME due to the 1.5 higher total resource cost of CS CAV. But this assumption is to simple and does not reflect the time needed to gather resources (RES). I made some assumptions and simplifications. Men gather non food RES and women just food. Walking time is not considered. Also rank two of MERC is not considered. Upgrades are considered as all researched in one phase. If you think about it, all assumptions and simplifications cheat for the MERC. Most player will have women gathering wood, walking time for wood is increasing over time compared to ME mines and having upgrades just for ME is cheaper then getting upgrades for 3 RES. I calculated the time needed to gather the resources to make a unit in total RES gathering time (TRGT) and compared it to the CS counterpart. INF MERC (60 ME, here I realized I was a bit lazy this is just valid for skirmisher INF) 0 upgrades: 72.0 % of time is needed to gather the RES for a INF MERC skirmisher compared to a CS skirmisher P1: 70.2 % P2: 68.5 % P3: 66.8 % CAV MERC (80 ME, here for speer/javalineer CAV, sword CAV is a little bit cheaper, see attached file) 0 upgrades: 60.0 % P1: 56.8 % P2: 55.1 % P3: 53.4 % Findings MERC have less total RES cost which results in lower TRGT, so they give a time advantage (obviously :D) RES gathering time for MERC decreases stronger with more upgrades, this is due to different strength in upgrades, food upgrades add less advantage, making MERC even more efficient with more upgrades MER CAV has a lower TRGT than MERC INF and with all other advantages (mobility, attack strength, HP) making them much better than MERC INF, probably the reason why MERC INF spam could not be seen in a25 Price for CAV MERC adjusted to the same time discount as for MERC INF Speer/JAV CAV: 96 ME Sword CAV: 99 ME This is just an proposal but it would kill 2 birds with one stone. It makes CAV MERC less OP and adjusts the TRGT of MERC CAV to that of MERC INF. I know there are also other ways to re-balance MERC. But as I wrote there are simplifications and assumptions favoring the MERC and therefore I think 90 ME for CAV MERC is still too low. I think the already elsewhere recommended 95 ME is a good starting point and I think there was even a mod were people tried this adjustment and were satisfied. I also might be wrong about that price. There are also other things to consider like the limited ME on map or in range of the CC, players making MERC also have a certain risk to get raided early on and CIVs more or less surely making MERC and being predictable therefore. But if you stay for 90 ME and it results in being balanced please make INF MERC also cheaper. a25 - OP MERC.ods

It seems the key mapping for the hotkeys is not included in the translation. Of course there is no need for the most of these (e.g. letters, F-keys) but a number of keyboard keys have a native description in daily use (e.g. space, left bracket). Can these be added to the translation? Or, in the case of punctuation and so, let the character itself show? Like with the arrows.

And because the range and effectiveness of archers reduced the area that was safe to travel through.

Agree on all

*could be made If the multiplier for CS spear cav is boosted to 2, should that also happen for the champion spear cavalry? Furthermore I think the hack armor could be nice as I deem spear cavalry to weak against infantry swordsmen.

I think the remaining HP can't be higher than 50%, and the occupied tower should be easier to destroy by the counter if it is not repaired or protected by the army.

Command & Conquer: Red Alert has a setting where you have to reduce the HP of a building to 25% in order to capture it.

I can get someone to record it if needed.

not unusable, but just unimpactful and hard to balance. Sort of gimmicky you know?

yes, I just hope to avoid adding things that might end up like the bribing mechanic.

Me neither. As stated it was a wild idea, to maybe broaden the approach a bit. Not sure if it would be wanted or could be implemented currently. And naturally it would need to be balanced.

first time I see it in some Indian Language. I also found out that you were Indian recently. I have already seen Japanese, Chinese, Indian, Filipino players.

Ideally it would be good to see some kind of wall buff for A26 already rather than A27.

Definitely agree.

A fair point, but towers are only ever as useful as whats in front of them. I never build towers in game anymore as they serve no purpose beyond being a vaguely annoying distraction to the opponent and me if they get captured, whats more they cost resources that are better used elsewhere. That being said I would prefer stronger walls over towers at this stage, after all there is a garrison bonus on walls, and I would like to have incentive to investing stone into passive fortifications.

Hey, as I said here It seems portable apps have no interest whatsoever in adding the game to their portable app repos. You can however install it on some machine and copy the files elsewhere. If you pass -writableRoot it'sll be 100% portable.

This. Just a wild idea: order a couple of guys (2 or 4 inf) to batter (like a special formation); for the price of 100 wood and with a setup time you get a handheld battering ram. But: the ram takes damage while dealing damage; it should be good to take down a sentry tower and then be useless. The ~formation could be released at any time, it would be destroyed when the units are killed.

Filter on "prop"

how about either they train from the buildings I mentioned above for 2 non-mace civs. This should neatly solve these issues. Maybe also give them a different price, but this may not be necessary.

If other civs can only make it from barracks while mace can from siege workshop this will help mace because they would have another p2 building option, one that is cheaper than a barracks and would not take up training time from other units. It would also mean they can make p3 rams with less delay than other civs. I think this option gives mace strategic ambiguity. If a player sees Enemy mace siege works in p2 they need to get ready for either p2 rams or p3 rams 1-2 mins later. This is a challenge to be sure.

You would only weaken them in order to capture them, arson would be for trash buildings. This is the case of CC. It shouldn't be easy to capture and it shouldn't be easy to destroy with a single battering ram.

hi guys i wouldnt say I'm a historian but rather a history fanatic with ancient warfare and in doing so its become somewhat of a hobby any who i just had some suggestions to make first off would have to be the 2 pila for roman hastati... the grape juice mod does a good job at this but for some reason the infantry misbehave in combat and brake their battle line and rans off to fight some other oak at the back (by the way ammo i think is a very good concept i think you guys should try implement in the future) next would be a to give formations bonus stats for the troops involved, for eg. forced march a speed boost maybe at the cost of armor as the infantry are off guard (just an example) lastly would be to correct some errors with some of the troops (i promise im not trying to be a critic, i love this game and its what started my hobby with ancient warfare) but the phalangtists (pikemen) were lightly armored because their primary defence was there 6 meter serisa pike and also strength in numbers, but i understand you guys did it for balancing proposes anyway i love this game and these are suggestions... not me criticizing your work, i hope you guys can see what i mean by this :)

Ram army go brrrrrrrrrrrr

In this forum ,(I googled and google show me our own forum) Is a makeup Isn't made by me but...I have same idea in mind and wheels.

Stanislas interview.

Excuse me, did you just say: