zzippy
-
Posts
209 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by zzippy
-
-
..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?
-
Hi again.
Ubuntu 12.10 isn't supported anymore. Try a supported version of Ubuntu to avoid software problems.
-
1
-
-
Hi!
Already playing this balanced branch for a few days, imho it is a big step forwards. At last fun is back in the game
..For those interested:
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.- Singers deal both crush and pierce damage.- All hard bonuses have been taken out.- Swordsmen cost less metal, but cost a little wood.Structures- All structures are now weaker against crush and hack damage.- Civic Centers have a better garrison multiplier in an attempt to combat 2v1 rushes.- Walls and Wall Towers take significantly longer to build.- 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.- Phasing now increases health to all citizen soldiers.
-
Hi!
After installing the dependencies you first have to download the source:
svn co http://svn.wildfiregames.com/public/ps/trunk/ 0ad
Then go to that workspaces directory:
cd 0ad/build/workspaces
and go on:
./update-workspaces.sh -j3 --with-system-enet --with-system-miniupnpc --with-system-nvtt --with-system-mozjs24
when done, switch to gcc directory:
cd gcc
and build:
make -j3
-
2
-
-
Balance branch would be a third version of the game, which dilutes the player base even more.
Why not balance the game in SVN directly?
As mentioned, game is already slightly rebalanced in SVN. Scythe's balance branch is a bit more radical, guess it does not fit the the way of "Design Committee" ?
Do not see the point in diluting player base: just get a 2nd or 3rd account and run the 2,3 lobbies simultanously.
-
Great idea that "embassy" in team games. Definitely worth to be discussed.
-
1
-
-
First thing that needs to be reworked is skirmcav.
If I understood correctly, the thread is about running a bughunting tournament in svn, where skirm cav already are nerfed (20 attack/40 range instead of 25/44 in a16). So this rework/rebalancing already is going on, unfortunately there is atm nearly nobody playing/testing svn, most of the time I am idling alone in svn lobby.
Imho the game urgently needs some rebalancing, to mention here is scythe's rebalance branch, which leads to the right direction. Please have a look at it.
New civs, historically correct stuff for seleucids, eg aso, are nice, but not what the game atm needs. That would be:
A design comittee which collects, publishes, discusses and finally solves the design flaws in gameplay, maybe bundled in 1 thread to discuss with the community.
I do not get why gameplay decisions are made in the dark, eg that blacksmith for certain civs in phase1, a feature that wasn't communicated nor discussed anywhere in the public, a complete surprise.
-
2
-
-
I agree. And what about that extremely overpowered wall turrets?
-
Suggestion:
Make Civic Center available at phase1 (maybe restricted to own territory), so that the annoying roman sword rush (especially in 2v2) gets senseless.
-
1
-
-
And this once-buildable-cart-or-bovine-unit-very-very-cheap isn't an easy target for you opponent who just crushed your cc?
Why not just start a new game when one is lost? ("..reborn from his/its ashes..")
---
Cuz of threadtitle I thought it was about eg getting victim of roman swordrush in minute 4 (which especially in 2v2 is deadly since 24 swordmen are enough. In a16 with testudo bug maybe less) and being unable to rebuild cc in phase I.
Your once-buildable-cart-or-bovine-unit-very-very-cheap would at least make the roman rush less op, another solution would be making cc available in phase I.
-
I understand what you mean, though isn't that realism?
In real life it's pretty hard to shoot someone in the testudo formation in 'cover mode'. The chance to do any damage might be close to zero for the back rows.
If you want to do something against it, then do what you would do in reality: break the formation (in reality it'd be pretty hard for the soldiers in the formation to throw something at you when you approach, though I'm not sure if that's true for 0AD too).
..sure, it sounds realistic that testudo reduces pierce attack. But:
- how to balance this? Other civs would need a similar advantage.
- testudo is a defensive formation, but it also has the same attack advantage (bug) as syntagma or phalanx. Realistically attack should decrease when in testudo.
-
1
-
-
Yes, but not simultanously. Then you would need that 2nd account ..
-
Yes, svn is a good solution without a bugfix 16.1 ..
Want to add here that running both (a16 + a17 svn) lobbies simultanously is possible with different accounts. Just ask one of the mods when creating a 2nd account and mark it as your svn account somehow. Eg I use z and z_svn, Tux has SVNTUX ..
ATM its pretty lonely in the svn lobby, so please join.
-
1
-
-
@iNcog
Thanks for your work/thread, for sure I will post a link from time to time in the lobby, since I saw users getting stuck with the wiki article in the past.
-
Erm, sorry, there is nothing to calm down. I already rebuilt my svn where this bug is fixed, np. I am just saying that gameplay is a mess now* in a16, and wanted to know if there will be a solution before a17.
*eg: impossible to send swordmen vs pikemen, since they are killed before they reach them.
-
.. linux. Why?
-
So, in your opinion, it makes sense to play with/vs syntagma formation? You must be kidding.
-
Hi folks.
Scythe already made a ticket for the syntagma bug.
My question:
Will there be a fix soon, means a 16.1 version of 0ad, or will we have to wait until a17 is done? And if so, are there any plans to release a17 soon?
For me a16 MP games are unplayable if a player chooses a civilisation with syntagma formation enabled. The "30m invisible lances" (as scythe described them in the lobbychat) are a gamekiller imho.
So, what will happen?
zzippy
-
Hi!
First, I want to thank all posters in this thread for their input, thoughts and suggestions.
Instead of socialising in a clan as someone called it or founding a club, following rules yet to be discussed, or creating an own mod without walls aso, it might be an alternative to give the host the responsibility for rules.
The host could name his game in a way (CCC was just a suggestion) so that everybody sees that certain rules had to be accepted for joining that host. Simply, eg:
Tau's 2v2: NoWalls/ships/caravan
Done. Further discussion in pre_game_lobby ?
-
If wall towers are really "overpowered" ...
Again:
A normal tower costs 100wood + 100 stone, buildtime 150, health 1000
A walltower costs 200 stone, buildtime 40, health 15000
You see any difference?
-
Well, this shouldn't be a discussion about rebalancing walltowers per se, should be only about not using them. To be honest, I thought (hoped) that you devs would be aware of it. If I knew that this isn't the case, I would have started to discuss walltowers rebalance...
Multiplayer OOS
in Bug reports
Posted · Edited by zzippy
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