Leaderboard

Buenos días o tardes; -Aquí la actualización de los Arsácidas(Parthians) (Se describe el imperio ,como uno extremadamente rico, con hermosas ciudades, y quiero reflejar eso) -Me inspiro en las ciudades fundadas por ellos (Nissa, Ctesifonte, Hatra...), no en las conquistadas, así parecen más únicas, originales y auténticas. -También @Lopess y yo pensamos en un bonus o tecnología especial, que los edificios tuvieran dos fases; Fase 1 o "nómada" con yurtas. fase 2 o “sedentaria” con construcciones de piedra. -Cuando construyes cada edificio, aparece como una yurta, y cuando eliges uno, pagas un extra, y ese edificio específico cambia (cambia su aspecto al de piedra,ya no se puede desmontar y trasladar,se vuelve más fuerte, tiene más área cultural, genera más población, más rango de visión, con algunas tecnologías más... etc.) (Para reflejar su cultura seminómada...y darle una jugabilidad interesante) -¿Qué opinan? Disculpen las molestias*

To offer a brief clarification, I am not saying that this is a necessarily bad thing. Many popular game series like Starcraft and Age of Empires reward players with high APMs. I also would note that of my albeit brief time playing the latest alpha, I have had fun; this is not about whether 0 AD is a good or bad game. That said, it is a fast game, with a casual player like myself feeling like I am running something more like a factory than a fledgling city. The reason I think this is important to note since 0 AD's vision contradicts the current game state. To consider this looking at training times shows at least in part why the game is fast-paced: Looking at 0 AD, women train in 8 seconds, infantry in 10, and cavalry in 15. Age of Empires II Villager training time: 25 seconds. Starcraft Probe training time: 20 seconds. Starcraft II Probe training time: 12 seconds Age of Mythology villager training time: 15 seconds. Age of Empires III settler training time: 25 seconds. Age of Empires IV villager training time: 25 seconds. Considering that aside from champions, all units have economic roles, training times should be significantly increased for all citizen soldiers and women. If we don't even consider batch training, which accelerates training even more, the early game becomes a frantic rush. Assuming that a player like myself starts by training women, something I think is intuitively sensible since they cost half as much as soldiers and produce the same economic output, the player is pressed to put all of them towards food production to maintain production before needing to rapidly pivot to wood to allow for the building of houses, eventually the barracks for citizen soldiers, and lastly farms for when berries inevitably run out. The barracks snowballs this even further, and the fact that a technology at a house makes you able to churn out even more women means that population growth feels exponential. I'm sure that there could be much better ways of playing, but intuitive way feels surprisingly intensive for what should be the most relaxed part of the game. I would advise at the very least increasing the training time of women to be 15 seconds. Infantry could take 20 seconds to train, and cavalry could take 25 seconds. These numbers, I would note, are a modest increase, and I would still argue that the game would feel fast paced. If we truly wish to make it game that does not force you to multitask too heavily, bumping everything up another five seconds could further help. These numbers are hardly perfect I'm sure, that's what playtesting is for, yet I think they would bring the game more in line with the game's vision.

If you post them here i might be able to help you find them

buenos días o tardes; -Aquí la actualización de la maravilla sueva: (En unos días estará disponible en el mod Endovélico) Disculpen las molestias*

we are working on that in historical too. Maybe share on server how some of the civs practice it differently?

Implementing a feature based on slavery could make a lot of differences. Firstly, it would be much more realistic and historical. Secondly, it would bring more differences between civilisations because they didn't practice slavery in the same way. Thirdly, slaves could be much more efficient at harvesting resources. The citizen soldier would therefore be more versatile and more defensive.

I want you to picture yourself 2000 years ago, you are chopping wood in the forest, and an enmey soldiers comes up to you. What do you do? A keep chopping wood B run and cry for help C piss your pants D fight back E ALL of the above

Just tested historical mod playing Spartans and they have a similar system with their Women, Helotes and CS: Women and champions can be trained in the CC while Helotes are trained only in a separate building. Champions cannot do anything except fighting (but they do it very well obviously ), Helotes can both gather and fight. Oh, and CS are trained in separate camps. Seems logical and diverse enough, at least for Sparta.

While I wouldn't call my attempt at understanding previous 'revisionist history,' the lack of any explanation on your part certainly warranted me speculating. Your final point was precisely what Selucids mentioned in this topic. Also, at least a few people seem positively inclined towards what I propose. Alpha 23 established a firm meta that 24 quite rudely shook up, and whether the outrage was due to a bad game decision or simply jarring change is not entirely clear to me. I am raising the issues of fast training times because it works against the philosophy of 0 AD, primarily I would add, in the early game, where build orders feel especially tight. Fastest click wins - In many RTS games, it isn't the player with the most intelligence or the best strategy that wins, it's the player who A] knows the proper order of actions and B] carries them out the fastest. People that practice a general procedure that is usually rewarding and know keyboard shortcuts should be slightly advantaged, and they will still be required; but, the if the opponent recognises their 'cookie cutter' gameplay, they should easily be able to outwit them by identifying and countering the unoriginal/over-used tactics with an effective counteractive strategy. If we look at this topic, I have noted that the early game requires a lot of tasks to stabilise production. The main concern raised seems to centre around mid to late game fights. So the question that stands is whether increasing the training times would cause a problem for those. As the proposal would stand, yes, but simple way to fix this would be making it so every phase up would reduce training times, perhaps even going to the level they are at now. That said, if the game already is punishing, perhaps the team should consider more explicit comeback mechanics.

My point isn't about game difficulty. I can beat normal AI easily enough. When I call myself a casual player, it is more that I play the game infrequently for this reason: never underestimate a player's ability to optimise the fun out of a game. I like thinking of the aesthetics or of my settlement when placing buildings; I like being able to cinematically watch battles unfold. Instead, I am frantically laying down houses while also ensuring that every building is cranking out units like a Camino cloning facility. Part of the reason that RTSs attract only the competitive scene is because games often cater to them specifically, truncating growth of new players. Perhaps to clarify my position, I am not saying that this alone is the solution; probably the reason it flopped in Alpha 24 was due to repercussions that Seleucids mentioned. Some people have rightly noted that batch training does make operating a base easier, but it also makes each unit train faster of course. A major side-effect of this is an even more constant need to build houses especially as other production buildings come online. Population limit in theory isn't that bad of a feature, but the frequency of needing to build them as the game's pace racks up becomes annoying to say the least.

Death rates in battles is a separate issue in my opinion, and I wouldn't mind a less lethal game in that regard. That said, none of what you said refutes my point that 0 AD is a demanding game in regards to APM. If a change like this makes the game too swingy, other things can be adjusted; that's part of a game's development cycle. If it makes P3 too hard to get to, the costs can be adjusted. I understand that you seem to be approaching the game from a highly competitive standpoint, but every level of play is important to consider, and the fact still stands that it makes this game harder for newer players and contradicts the game's vision.

Hey I did a reasonable chunk of the A25-A26 porting for the mod I've added you on Discord. Ping me if you need help. There are some migration scripts here https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/Stan/pyrogenesis-migration-scripts

I said this because I had not even seen any siege on the list and it seemed strange to me that they had not had one, being so prosperous economically and militarily they do not have those tools so to speak