Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 2022-03-11 in all areas

  1. Again, here we are debating whether we should basically just revert the game to a23. I want it basically exactly as it was before: forts let you immediately train champs, barracks let you train champs with a tech, and a few civs have "champ spam" strats available because they have special buildings that train champs (with the tech the barrack requires and the champ buildings are easier to make than forts). The problem with the current status is that training champs from barracks totally clogs your unit production pipes because champs train slower than regular units. So if you want to go for champs that often means that you have to risk quickly dropping your population and then hopping the enemy doesn't just spam steamroll you while you slowly rebuild your pop with champs. Relatedly, there were a ton of p2 champs and buildings that were eliminated form a23-->a24. None of this should've occurred without an adequate replacement. The game was better when it had more options and civs were more unique.
    3 points
  2. Hello, I am just getting into modding and have looked at the wiki tutorials. I am modding SVN. Now, I am running into trouble in getting a unit to be produced from the gaul forge. My intention is to make the Gaul forge produce a unit that can garrison in ally forges and give them a resource and research time discount. I created the following directories in my new mod folder: simulation/templates/units/gaul/ gaul_armorer_cart.xml simulation/templates/structures/gaul forge.xml simulation/data/auras I wasn't sure if it was necessary, but I also included the "parent" units in the mod folder directories as well. (Do I need to do that?) So in the templates folder I have: gaul/forge.xml Parents: template_structure.xml,template_structure_military.xml, template_structure_military_forge.xml units/gaul/gaul_armorer_cart.xml Parents: template_unit.xml, template_unit_support.xml Besides creating the structure, unit, and aura, I also edited template_structure_military.xml to allow for garrison of Support units, as that is what my new unit is. That worked fine because I can garrison a woman in there now. When I play as Gauls and click on the forge, there are no options to do anything and I get a bunch of errors: GetTemplateData@gui/session/session.js:233:25 setupButton@gui/session/selectionpanels.js:984:33 setupUnitPanel@gui/session/unit_commands.js94:35 updateUnitCommands@gui/session/unit_commands.js:152:18 updateSelectionDetails@gui/session/selection_details.js:537:20 updateGUIObjects@gui/session/session.js:730:2 onSimulationUpdate@gui/session/session.js:680:2 __eventhandler54 (SimulationUpdate)@session SimulationUpdate1.1 Error calling component script function ScriptCall Errors executing script event "SimulationUdate" JavaScript error: gui/session/session.js:225:34 I looked at the JavaScript files but am way out of my depth in terms of knowing what to do about it. For the unit, I intended on just using the trade cart icon and visual actor, without changing them. Do I need to make directories for the trade cart icon and visual actor and put them in my new mod folder if I am not adjusting any of their values? Is there something else I need to do to make my unit appear in the gaul forge to make it producible? Below is my code: forge.xml gaul_armorer_cart.json (aura) template_structure_military_forge.xml gaul_armorer_cart.xml Thank you so much for taking the time.
    2 points
  3. A building that is only useful for one tech--that is rarely researched--for most civs isn't a useful building. See also Wonders.
    2 points
  4. A24 was suboptimal for many reasons. From a macro level, Rushing, Booming, and Turtling should all be viable strategies. The important thing is to make them balanced. I would honestly like to see Walls become a viable and balanced structure in Alpha 27, but that's a different topic.
    2 points
  5. This is no longer the case. I used the river placement function and things look pretty good for now (screenie attached).
    2 points
  6. Part of the issue with Ptolemies is that they have 2 eco bonus when some of the other civilization have none. There was probably a need to rethink all bonuses after deciding to apply team bonus to the civilization itself too. I think removing at least the farmstead from the bonus could be useful. When Ptolemies get extra berries/hunt, the low wood cost of their farmstead tend to accentuate too much the potential imbalance of the map. For the rest, it should fit the rethinking of all team/civ bonuses I think. I don't like the idea of just nerfing it too much because Ptolemies economy is too strong. Better replace it by something very different than mute the bonus up to the point where it become irrelevant.
    1 point
  7. Very true. Also something I call building micro, which is were you micro garrisoned troops in and out of buildings to kill strategic objectives like rams.
    1 point
  8. Depends on their composition and the competence of the turtler.
    1 point
  9. I think we should keep the ptol house bonus, but I agree this civ is pretty op. In particular, having 3 really strong heroes is kinda nuts meanwhile athens has one okay hero and two wastes of resources.
    1 point
  10. Why not decrease? I think that means that forts should not be buffed. At the other hand if you really want that a fort can train champs again it's probably not the worst thing.
    1 point
  11. There should indeed be a general technology that strengthens the tower while strengthening the fortress in P3.
    1 point
  12. A further idea I just had is to utilize the tower upgrades as concepts for upgrades to the fortress, being a more valuable building theoretically there would be more incentive to actually spend the resources on it. Those tower upgrades get zero priority otherwise as I no longer build towers because to me they are now useless resource wasters.
    1 point
  13. Can you explain this sentence, is there still a reference somewhere that siege weapons are capturable? Use your native language if it is easier, translators are very good these days.
    1 point
  14. It was added with changeset [rP16550] (20/Apr/15) and removed with changeset [rP24685] (18/Jan/21).
    1 point
  15. Redundancy Theory strikes again! But really, we aren't so far apart. A few comments: Alpha 24 was ostensibly designed to be a "reset" alpha, as the balance was seen as too unwieldly. It was never meant to be "the" game's design. At least, that's how I saw the changes. "Going back" to Alpha23. I don't think that's the goal here. Were some things better in Alpha 23? Absolutely. But we are trying to move forward, not simply trying to recapture the feel of a past alpha.
    1 point
  16. Ministers have 20/s capture speed - thats twice as much as heroes have. Isnt it too much? Fields are cheaper, smaller and need only 3 women. Thats a huge advantage. And no, they are not much slower. After first farming tech only 10% slower than normal fields with first tech, and if all techs are researched the difference is only like 2%. Reason is that farming with 5 women at once has a higher debuff than farming with 3 women at once Is the first hero not too good? It helps all allies and own units on the whole map. If an ally combines him with an own speed hero the speed bonus will be like 32% - isnt that way too fast? Enhanced Civic centers seem to be too powerful because of 40 Projectiles and 40 garrison size - how is one supposed to destroy that? Especially as there are additional techs for extra health. If you conquer barracks or stables of another civ, you can train champions there. Must be a bug, it's too OP
    1 point
  17. I've been saying this since the first days of a24: the globalization of the siege factory was a bad change. It made mace less unique (no more siege rush strategy, which was offset by Mace's inability to kill enemy rams). It also made the game extremely on dimensional where it its mostly quick p3 at 80% pop cap-->skip fort-->siege spam-->hooe you win the first push because the person who starts destroying buildings first wins. It's more than that: it's extremely hard to beat a quick siege spam strategy because siege can be built quicker than multiple forts. This is a direct result of siege workshops existing for every civ.
    1 point
  18. Possible Solutions: Make the Gymnasium the Athenian's barracks and move things around. Make the Gymnasium cheaper and stronger in some way. Because originally all of the other champions in the game were trained from the expensive Fortress. The Gymnasium also had a bonus for garrisoning troops inside. This made the Gymnasium a great structure, and added some historical flavor to the Athenians. Since then, there have been many changes to the game, some of which were mistakes, IMHO, like moving champions to the barracks, etc.
    1 point
  19. Yep... it's not fun waiting for a messiah (especially when one can envision some of the solutions that are needed, but recognize that it is beyond your power to deliver them). For all my @#$%ing about these topics, I do have a great deal of respect for you active developers who are keeping the lights on and consistently delivering incremental progress (and valuable experimentation) in so many areas. You guys deserve more praise.
    1 point
  20. It's a bid sad that Athenians can't train champions in their stables, and not in their barracks neither. Only Spartans share this weakness, and they have at least the skiritai commandos in their barracks which are something like semi-champions. The gymnasion has a weakness: It's too big. It's so big that if you build it at the border you will gain like no territory at all.
    1 point
  21. Ideas for cartography Public domain. Ptolemy world map.
    1 point
  22. Patch: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4531.
    1 point
  23. If you surround a group of units and a resourse by buildings and then make these units gather the surrounded resourse, they will collect it and the overall amount of it will increase in the upper menu, despite them having no way of carrying said resourse to the warehouse.
    1 point
  24. emphasizing defense is fine and all but why on earth do people want turtling to be a viable strategy? I think currently, a successful defense is maybe just a little too hard to pull off, but that it is still very rewarding to quickly counterattack. A24 was a defensive alpha and I think most people agree it was sub-optimal. As for the fort training champs situation, i like @chrstgtr's solution with forts and barracks training champs, but with the tech needed for barracks.
    0 points
×
×
  • Create New...