zzippy

....yeah. Also walkspeed reduced a little (-10% average) ?

As an attempt to rerail the thread a little, and also cuz suggested by Stanislas69, here again the changelog of the balancing branch, so its easier to discuss certain points and have an overview (I added a little, sure I forgot something, may scythe check this ?): Changelog - Differences from SVN--------------------------------Units- Cavalry have been made weaker to pierce damage, but more resilient against hack.- Rams can now attack all units. In compensation, all organic units get a default of 3 Crush armor.- Ballistas and Onager have a much longer range and vision.- Ballistas deal much more damage.- Healers now cost only food since metal is quite rare.- Elephants now are significantly stronger but more expensive.- The basic formations have been disabled for the time being (with a surprising performance benefit).- Female Citizens train much faster.- Elite Iberian Skirmishers have been nerfed.- All units attack faster.- Slingers deal both crush and pierce damage.- All hard bonuses have been taken out.- Swordsmen cost less metal, but cost a little wood.- Seleucides have ranged infantry in phase1- Walkspeed for all units increased- Gathering capacities decreased because of new techs, starts now with 10 - Mauryan spearman now cost 50food/50wood instead of 50food/40woodStructures- All structures are now weaker against crush and hack damage.- Civic Centers have a better garrison multiplier in an attempt to combat 2v1 rushes. (arrow rate increased from 3arrows/s to 5 arrows/s, also arrow range +50%)- Walls and Wall Towers take significantly longer to build. (Walls 10-30 seconds, walltowers 120s)- Significantly nerfed the Roman Entrenched Army Camp.- Farms have increased HP and more armor against hack and pierce attacks.Technologies- Some technologies have been made expensive (wip)- Some pair technologies have been unpaired.- Added a powerful tech to the wonder. (increases pop max +50, costs 1000 wood/stone/metal)- Phasing now increases health to all citizen soldiers.

Maybe as a gaul hero? Attracting all deer and stone gathering +50% aura?

Strange that I never see one of you guys in the balance branch lobby. Are you talking about scythe balance branch at all? Otherwise, do you mind to stop derailing this thread and post your gameplay ideas in the thread they belong to?

Yes. Thats the problem right now in a16. And the idea is to fix this a little for a17 to reduce scirm cav attacks in the beginning of the game, less "horsegame" .. Afair: in scythe balance branch (btw, the topic of this thread ...) this is achieved by cc arrow rate, stronger fields. Played lots of times, and I like it, knowing that eg Tango_ (by far a more experienced player) was not a friend of the arrow rate. Michael nerfed skirm cav, pierce damage 25% reduced to 15 ..

+1 Just ensure that all civs have ranged infantry units available in phase1 to be able to counter a cav rush without being forced to train cav skirm?

Those "2 quick tests" indeed were with athenians which only have slingers in phase1, so no way vs skirm cav due to speed malus. Pike/spearmen too. Fields are too weak. So the only cav rush counter is to train lots of cav too (a16ish horsegamealarm ) .. Why is crush damage "weird" for slingers? Those guys throw rocks at you. Try with your car and decide after inspecting the damage if its more pierce or crush This attempt doesn't aim the problems of a16 successfully, for my taste .. but, being a non pro player Interested in other opinions after a few more hours of testing, and thanks for that data sheet. Hopefully a good compromise will be found before a17.

So you think its a good way to cooperate? Ah "Surprise" commit over night? To me it seems as there would be no communication at all about balancing the game/gamedesign. But that might be the restricted view of a non_dev .. edit: and, after 2 quick tests: its still a horsegame like a16. Skirm cav totally op.

We should not discuss svn here, this thread is about scythe branch

Worth trying? Its commited to svn, so its in the game right now. "Suprise" is Mythos' commit message. Indeed, a big suprise. After weeks of testing here in the balance branch, he (didn't he kinda leave the team?!) jumps in and changes the game "..after lengthy discussion with Enrique" and "suprises" the other devs with a complete rebalance. Sorry, but: LOL. Is this the way of constructive game design? If I were scythe I would be a little more than "suprised".

Yeah, minimum distance should be increased a little. A cata nearly cannot be taken down if positioned between 2 garrisoned fortresses. Also the effective -but boring- fortress_forward _tactic would be a little nerfed then ..

I don't get it: You disagree that there is no such thing as balancing for inexperienced players, on the other hand you agree that unexperienced players are too unexperienced to exploit an imbalance...isn't that exactly what wraitii says?

You already have installed the current version of the game via software-center and can play the game (a16). Those build instructions are only for the development version of the game (svn/a17).

In scythe' balance branch wonders have a tech: increase pop cap + 50 ... Hopefully this will be in a17..

As Fradiavolo said, the little sword&shield icon shows the arrow rate of the building (here a fortress) which increases when soldiers are garrisoned.

Punish? The wise man just smiles .. .......... Jagst3r21, iNcog, auron2401, what about hanging out in balance lobby a little more? Mostly we miss a 4th man for a decent 2v2. Btw, we created a jabber chatroom where we svn/sbb players normally hangout and arrange for matches or discuss balancing: 0adtalk@conference.jabber.ccc.de

What about the new walkspeed? I'd like to hear a few thoughts about walkspeed increase, since a few balance branch* testers claimed that it is too fast. In my opinion it should be decreased a little again; generally spoken its a step in the right direction (a16 feels like slowmotion when used to balance branch ) ... Your opinions? * note that scythe created a rollback branch which makes a game without oos possible

Just a question @Auron2401: How many games vs human opponent have you played in balance branch yet? I see no "champions problem"at all, at least not before fixing/rebalancing the basics.

It has an effect if you garrison catapults. You can garrison 50 (!!) of them in a quinquereme. If you attack opponents port, as close as possible, that port is gone in seconds ..

Then you had to spend some money for printing; advertising virtually -as already suggested- only costs time ..

Here is an attachment containing oos_dump.txt and commands.txt of both players. We played scythe balance branch, but since oos occurs there after scythe merged svn, I guess its also as useful. Thanks for your time, devs Let me know if we can do anything more to help concerning this oos issue. zzippy oos.zip

..yes. It is on a good way I think. Btw, if I understood scythe correctly, the Windows version is fixed meanwhile, so why not give it a try (again), iNcog?

Generally its a good idea to sort out possibly skill gaps by having a few games vs same opponent, both playing the same civ. Only if you are on par with your opponent it makes sense to compare different civs, and maybe this is only true for really good players. Also I think (maybe pretty wrong) that first a civs units have to be balanced between themselves, and when this is done (for all civs), it makes sense to compare/rebalance different civs.

No. There was a guy announcing "a german 0ad community" he wanted to create after asking 0ad developers, but -afaik- nothing happened at all so far.

Your feedback is based on testing, means gaming vs humans? Have not seen you yet in the balance branch lobby. Whats your nick there?