Leaderboard

Two new maps, which are quite similar. I made the long cliffs more in a direction from center to edge, giving every player a pielike place, funneling all attacks through the center of the map. But bots can't handle this topographie very well. Even with an ensured path to everyone else, the often stand on the cliffs hurling missiles at each other. While citizen go on huge walks just to gather some resources just on the other side of the cliff. Also just one tower close to the edge of the cliff can deplete an entire economy, because the bots are just ignore them. And it seems sometimes warriors just stand around, just as they are stucked. Even a noob like me can win easily when exploiting these flaws. These maps may only work well with human players. The first map 'a' has longer cliffs inside the own territory, the map 'b' has an additional valley. Below you see an undistorted "heightmap" of 'a' and 'b'. This gives the basic idea of the map, since the distorsion will not change the logic, the pathes, that you can choose. Observe, that all maps are rotationally symmetric in nearly every aspect. The trees are randomly set, but in a determined area, which are again rotationally symmetric. Also the textures are randomly, but have determined areas for different sets of texture. Also every base have some starting resources, which are the same for every base (except the kind of tree is random, and the angle of the resources is random). The bases are aligned to the basic grid, that should make adding infrastructure more easy. With texture but without mines and forest the 'b' looks like this: with all the distorsion but without resources it looks like this. 20240928.zip

My understand is that 6948 was just meant to deal with the building vs. unit issue. A unit will still be high priority (despite not being hittable) if it is within min range. In checking that a higher priority unit exists, this unit would also have to be in the allowed range, so I think a single solution could solve both these issues.

This is a new approach to map design, using algorithms to determine key elements. The topography, placement of towns, and locations of mines are dictated by mathematical functions, while textures and trees exhibit only minimal randomness. The randomness is largely restricted to the parameters of these functions, allowing for controlled variability. A major advantage of this approach is that it enables the creation of very large-scale structures, particularly long cliffs. I focused on several key aspects: map generation should be fast, the topography should present a challenge, and the entire terrain should be accessible with minimal wasted space. Additionally, each player should have an equally balanced environment, which is why the terrain is rotationally symmetric. The topography consists entirely of cliffs, each with a steep side and a gentle slope. As a result, there are no prominent mountains, and the overall height profile remains uniform. My goal is to define maps based on the length of cliffs, the asperity (the distance between cliffs), and the number of directional changes. I also want to create distinct areas with varying asperity, such as plains and valleys compared to more rugged regions. I've attached a first test version of the map and would love for you to give it a try. While I've already tested to ensure that the bots navigate without getting stuck, I’m relatively new to this kind map design and haven't played 0 A.D. for over a year. As a result, I may not be the best judge of whether the map is truly engaging or balanced. That’s where you come in! Your experience and feedback would be invaluable in refining the map. I’m eager to hear your thoughts on how it plays and whether it offers a fun and challenging experience. proc20240927a.zip proc20240927a.zip

These are necessary too. But does it get at the issue that I am getting at and that you are getting at here: My understand is that 6948 was just meant to deal with the building vs. unit issue. A unit will still be high priority (despite not being hittable) if it is within min range.

Yeah, quite often. I find it aggravating when I'm pulling cav back and some pedestrian motherhugger hits me from ~halfway across the map. Maybe pikemen do it, but of course it's very noticeable with the punch crossbows have.

Sieges engine shouldn't be usable as main units in army, instead they should be tactical units to add to a combo. In vanilla a26, bolts fulfill this role, also because of it's limitations (pack time, min range), but with good stats (good damage and range). Instead of seeking to make bolts spamable superchamps, sieges towers could have been balanced to reach this status too, with for example a capture aura buff or something instead of hit and run op arrows. The more tactical units you can use for combos, the more micro that isn't the classical 'snipe and dance' will add and make battles more interesting. If the issues is that microing too much unit type is too hard, then maybe adding features to ease base micro can improve players experience. Well I already know the trend will go exactly against what I say above as it have been explained to me enough times.