Leaderboard

Speaking of under used features, what about shifting the Roman castrum to second phase? Perhaps returning more of its siege making capabilities too, the complaint that it was getting used as a cheaper siege workshop is now invalid since everyone has a siege workshop now.

I will also add that, for now I don't really see a point in doing a (significant enough) cavalry nerf. At the end of the day, infantry is still hugely useful in 1v1 and in team games as well, a transition to cavalry if not well timed can just lead to being overrun by infantry. For the current state I only see a small damage nerf to skirm cav to be interesting. I'd consider the gameplay of mostly ranged infantry CS to be worse. There is not even an attempt in transitioning away from a unit we make from the beginning of the game. Instead of fine tuning stuff like this, I'd be more interested in some more radical changes, such as for example straight up halving the attack rate of all ranged units (so reducing their DPS by that much), accompanied by a melee cav nerf. That could rehabilate melee infantry and maybe champions as well. Experiment, bring new units to the light, try to reach a new balance.

Hello! If we have fight like this: Unit A: attack: 10 pierce, interval: 1 sec Unit B: resistance: 5.0 pierce (41%), health 100 What that means, how many seconds needs unit A to kill unit B? And what "41%" means? And comparing to that what about Unit C: resistance: 1.0 pierce (10%) Is Unit C 5x weaker than Unit B? Or 5 - 1 = 4

I was thinking if we can replace the current UI design of tree selection from To (wireframe) Some reason we should do it. The in-frame pic shows which tree have you select currently. Wood icon instead of build icon tells that this tree is not for building but for wood collection. Extend use case - If we ever implement the idea of planting forest, then this will be good for diffrentiating platable trees and non-plantables. @wowgetoffyourcellphonewhat do you think?

This is outside of said game. Don't think it's in-game. This is the actual in-game.

All supported Windows versions have the same paths, at least by default.

Is this (bold font and colour) we could implement swiftly?

You're right, it should be false.

Following change may break some mods: For security reasons planing to restrict access for ReadFile, ReadFileLines, WriteJSONFile, ReadJSONFile, ListDirectoryFiles, FileExists to the following folders/files: "gui, simulation, maps, campaigns, saves/campaigns, config/matchsettings.json, config/matchsettings.mp.json" adding "moddata" if some mods need to access and ship custom files that don't fit into other locations mentioned above (https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4617)

It doesn't

If that's what gets through from 10 damage and 41% resistance I think it should be 5.9. That's why dancing was nerfed. You can try it, but I think that horse is gonna die pretty quick. That's why forge upgrades and will to fight make a difference.

Yeah, sorry but Search function on forum doesn't help much - I already tried to find. But how you got 6.9 value? Oh, they can miss as well? Yeah, then that "dancing" technique makes sense. I could put cavalry in front and order to go left-right? Or better let them fight? IDK man.... I am trying to understand what units to build to counter opponent. I think that 5-10% more efficient fight is big deal in that big fights against equal or better opponent. It's hard to catch everything on Forum so I am trying to analyze replays and compare units.

I hate it.

41% of pierce damage inflicted to unit B is denied by its pierce resistance, hence, unit A needs 100/6.9 = 15 landed hits to kill unit B. please only mind percentage resistance, the absolute value before that is related to the exponential of the percentage resistance, and it's not really necessary to understand it, but if you are comfortable with math you can do some research on the forum and see how that works, there are other threads like this one you created. also if you want to know what's the chance of ranged attacks to hit or to miss (melee attacks always hit) you should find some answers in the forum, but that's actually quite messy and much more complicate.

there are bees as particles in the hyrule conquest mod, you might want to use those if you get the permission

I think the "players only make range units" is a self-fulling prophecy. Han is the most easily countered civ. All you have to do is make spears. But no one does so they have problems with Han’s sword cav and crossbows. I don't have a strong opinion on the new spear cav yet

Possibly they could have a pikeman unit https://europabarbarorum.fandom.com/wiki/Illyrioi_Peltophoroi_(Illyrian_Light_Phalanx)

Not really evidence but i read the Mars of Todi was dedicated by someone with a Celtic name (Ahal Trutitis); although not sure if it's supposed to be scale (It is also interpeted as lamellar or even cloth armor) Plutarch's description for Viridomarus' armor seems to be some sort of composite armor indeed. Possibly a variation of Celtic organic armors, but with a metal element covered in silver and gold (Either Scales or a Itallic Cardiophylax). Maybe even a decorated chainmail; but the description of colours and broideries fits more with cloth i think.

I recommend you try using cav, swords and siege. Rome has good cav with a good hero. Their sword cav champ with hero is one of the strongest combos In game. Not all civs have swords so rome melee can slice through a lot of enemies. Siege is great. There are more options than just spam range CS

About chicken rushes in team games, I agree that in the case of one team having an imbalanced line-up like 1800 + 1300s, if the all-in is well executed it could be possible to slow down the 1800 at the price of slowing down even more a lower rated player and therefore winning the game. However, the chicken rush is not the only way to do it, for example a 2v1 rush could do it well and is not new. I have not seen enough TGs to see if it is a problem. One all-in strategy was done against me this alpha but it was using ranged inf CS not cav, and was unsuccessful. It is tricky because if the defender gets even a 20 pop advantage early on against his adversary that can easily snowball to victory without the pocket's situation being relevant. If the chicken rush really is a problem in TGs, then a 2min or 3min ceasefire could do the trick. Also having teammates sending resources could help a lot, as you could safely build your forces without being slow down too much.

also untrue. I've been "taken out of a game" early sometimes in a TG, I've taken other players out of a game, this is just what happens when someone rushes another player, and the defender is outplayed. other times the defender outplayes the rusher, just like in 1v1s. the only difference ia that two or more allied players can gang up and attack one defender at a time, but this is a strategy way more difficult than it seems, and less effective. also it's very counterable, using equal teamplay.

For now I'm claiming to be able to deal with it without preparation, only by scouting and adapting. I would take the issue more seriously if I needed to alter my build just because of the possibility of a rush, but right now it's not the case. That said I still didn't play a lot this alpha so if anyone wants to challenge me and try to prove me wrong i'd be happy to play some 1v1s so we have more data about this strategy. Only problem is I'm not very active in lobby

Else perhaps lower rated players could take some reference on how to beat the chicken strategy. From my experience, the best way on how to play against it is scouting it, then if there are more cav coming than you can fight, just take all woodcutters back to the CC to take straggler trees. You should have still a way better eco than your opponent so then you can build numbers of men who can fight, and go out when ready. Counterattacking can also be effective in that situation although it requires some technique.

@Ceres: Playing devil's advocate here: Could the game detect which OS it is running on and then automatically present the correct paths ? Answer: could be risky if OS is incorrectly detected. Also if one actually intends examining the paths of another OS it might be better suited to select this from the buttons you presented. So, trying to counter adverse interventions - I do like your approach! Best regards, Grautvornix

You're just too OP.

I have not seen evidence of cav domination in 1v1s. My first 3 games against ValihrAnt this alpha were victories from me after he committed to making more cavalry than me, resulting in myself having eco advantage. I played 3 games against vinme where he was trying to make a point about hunt biomes supposedly forcing games to be about making more and more cav, only for me to win by making (way) fewer cav and focusing on defense. Of all 1v1s I played this alpha, I only ever lost once to an opponent making a lot of cav early on, and that only was because I was taken by surprise from my own mistake.

a good read. Check this fragment "In June, in the fading sunlight of a Chiapas afternoon, Mr. Gomez showed Dr. Scherer around the off-site facility in which the most treasured relics were stored. He pointed out tools, clay pots, sling stones, grinding stones, a stucco jaguar head. When he brought forth a handsomely carved flint spear point, Dr. Scherer beamed with familiarity" https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2022/09/13/science/archaeology-mayan-mexico.amp.html Other about clothes. https://www.archaeology.org/issues/387-2007/features/maya-clothing

I really like that players have more control over balancing now, but right now I worry about the pace of the changes. If change gets too fast, players will not be able to adapt to the new "rules" of the game and can't say if a previous change was good or bad. Is there any rule how much time we give to the players to see if the last changes can be kept or need to be refused?

The root cause is that a lot of patches have multiple components. People select the 3rd option when they are split on a proposal. An easy fix would be to break proposals down into their constituent parts (i.e., one proposal to nerf ptol her and one proposal for athens hero instead of combining both into one) and then making the poll binary. There's a lot of changes already. I would suggestion caution. Change by itself isn't good. And when there are a bunch of variables it is very difficult to tell what one proposal does and doesn't do. For example, the cav nerf could actually not have a big impact because smaller CC ranges significantly slow booms, which makes rushing (i.e., cav) stronger. I don't know if any of that hypothetical is true right now, but it's possible and I wouldn't be able to confidently terse out an explanation if it did occur. ------ Right now, we have more than enough support for several proposals to implement them. I think we should do that and see how it impacts the game/how people like them. If those proposals are good, we should actually make tickets to implement them for a27. Then we can figure out what next changes to do.

It might make sense to clean them up but not manually. I think a possible solution is to create a pre-commit hook to filter/disallow such information.

I wouldn't mind anyway, a reset would be nice. I think there could be a reset with every new alpha, like a new season.

https://www.ageofempires.com/news/aoe2de-update-47820/ Other example. use of bold (makes it easier to read between the lines... I mean read faster) and use of colors (green) to represent the increase of stats. https://www.ageofempires.com/news/age-of-empires-iv-winter2021-update/ AoE IV is not as good as the previous one and is not consistent.