Jump to content


Community Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Zezil

  1. So guys, if you want check my mod, here it is https://github.com/Zezil/zezilmod It's a gameplay mod, its purpose is to give the player the chance to choose from a variety of different build orders, which counter each other. This way scouting becomes very important and creativity and improvisational skills get rewarded. Strategic aspect of the game becomes the most prevalent (as opposed to how the game right now is, very tactical and micro oriented) and mindgames become part of the game. In order to obtain such a different feel, the main changes are the following: Soldiers can only be produced from barracks.In order to give the possiblity to make men earlier (rush & turtling build orders), decrease on wood cost for soldiers and most age1 structures.In order to give the possiblity to boom, batch spawn bonus is increased for women in the cc (a booming build order will revolve around making big batches of women, which will require a fast housing and therefore won't allow an early barrack)Decrease of cc fire power to balance attack and defenceThis are the main changes and the mod is not complete yet. To really be able to balance a turtling stance, it's required some testing. So testers who believe in the idea or are just courious are welcome. I'd love to have your feedback. Thanks again to those who helped me to mae the mod. Mario
  2. Capturing is at this state of things a very powerful tool, 20 champions can capture a cc defended by other 20 champions(with a forth nearby) 30 champions can capture a cc fully agrrisoned with men ,close to a fort fully garrisoned with men, and 30 skirmishers dealing damage to champions. Tests were done with all the men being fully upgraded and by champions I mean champion melee swordmen footmen. Scenarios are similar to those of a17 where you'd just wait your opponent to overextend and hit ccs wih your sword cav, and a18 mauryan warriors. Both those thing have been nerfed so I guess same will be done with capturing... Elexis suggested increasing the bonus to capture points that garrisoned units give to the owner, so that a garrisoned building is harder to take. That wouldnt prevent matches from being ended by sneaky champs hitting an uncovered cc ,but it's an idea (10 champs walking on the borders of the map until they get to the back of the enemy cc to conquer it... i dont know if thats something we want) Anyway in my opinion it is a too powerful tactical tool right now, as soon as one of the sides commits to an attack, the other can simply send 10 champs behind enemy lines and win the match.
  3. I see....so I should start working on the latest SVN copy since you told me templates have changed because of capturing. Then make the mod work with only the modded files in it, and then share it on git. Ok, once all of this is done, I'll post a link right here. Maybe a week or 2 if everything goes as planned. Stay tuned I guess! Thanks as always. Mario.
  4. I saw the super mario joke coming x) I get everything but the mod.json thing, what's that?
  5. Hey guys, thanks to sanderd and leper, even a computer noob like me could make his own mod. The mod focuses around the gameplay aspect of the game, trying to make decision making and strategic abilities a central part of the game, doing a few tweaks to structures role and some units stats and cost. To have a better view of the project, check this topic http://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=19828 I make this topic not just to gather eventual testers, wich would help in the near future, but also because i have some questions: How do i share my mod? How do i make the mod less heavy? all the "public" files are in the mod folder right now, should it work if I only put the modded file in it or is there some stricter rules to follow to make it run? i once tried to only put the "simulation" folder, but didnt work for some reason. Thanks in advance! Mario.
  6. Yeah , at first i tried just copying the simulation folder in my mod, but this way my mod didnt appear when i tried to turn it on in the mod manager. I went the easy way copying everything , just to try and see if i could really commit myself to the modding or if it was way out of my abilities. I'll try to first make a little mod, doing the least amount of job possible to get the feel of my idea going and to try to figure out how to balance it. Once I can tweak and test easily and fast ,it shouldn't take too much time. Problem is that game stucks at 15% now...I'll try different ways around, i'll mess with the cc templates and see if i can find a way to get it done, and if i cant i'll go deeper to understand the problem i get now. About my version being outdated....i fear that starting to work on a version of the game i haven't played and that i dont know might be a problem...so maybe i can keep 2 mod, one with all the svn commits you're doing and another with the a18 balance, if i'll be able to make a mod with only the folders i change in it. Anyway I'll work on it the next days and see how it goes, wait for updates Thanks you! Mario.
  7. Thank you leper! First i was trying to do the modification with open office and i got error, game did load but failed to load the template and i ended up having no civil center at all. Now that i'm using notepad++ i dont get errors anymore but loading of the game is stuck at 15% and doesnt start. I'll keep trying and update you, if have any hint thanks in advance edit: I got a crashlog,an interestinglog(wich is an empty xml file) , a system_info and a mainlog, those came from the tries to run the game i did this morning. Crashlog first line is: (error while formatting error message)....after that i get the specifications of my hardware. mainlong goes like this: "0 A.D. Main log Loading config file "config/default.cfg" Loaded config string "windowed" = "false" Loaded config string "showdetailedtooltips" = "false" Loaded config string "splashscreendisable" = "false" [and a lot of other messages like those]" System info gives first the hardware specifications and then things like this "OpenGL Extensions: GL_EXT_blend_minmax GL_EXT_blend_subtract GL_EXT_blend_color ....and so on" Hope those help(now that i use notepad++i dont get errors, but as i said above game cant load more than 15%)
  8. Yeah, I created a mod folder and put all the folders that are in the public folder. Now I'm basically changing stuff and trying to see if it works, but I'm getting errors. Tell me if i guessed wrong, all the .xml you can see (in no folder) here template_structure_civic_civil_centre.xml describes all the features common to all civil centers in the game, and athen_civil_centre.xml will add to the first template ,just for the athenian cc, the fact that it can recruit 3 different types of soldier, plus the history description and aging specification) So I thought that just by changing the <Production queue> in athen cc template tag, I should be able to make cc unable to produce soldiers. This is how it appears on public <ProductionQueue> <Entities datatype="tokens"> units/athen_infantry_spearman_b units/athen_infantry_slinger_b units/athen_cavalry_javelinist_b </Entities> <Technologies datatype="tokens"> -phase_town_generic phase_town_athen -phase_city_generic phase_city_athen </Technologies> </ProductionQueue>In the mod I guessed that just deleting the entities tag should've been enough to do the trick, but i get errors, game fails to load the template.
  9. I agree with the first 3 quotes ,and thank you a lot for the last bit. So basically if I get to change those templates on my svn copy and simply save the changes, once I open the game I get my version, or do I have to do more fancy stuff to get the changes going?
  10. I think wood tower and defense towers in general need a rebalancing too, and about the resources placement thing you said, I'm planning to make some maps ,simmetrical with resources placing ,and not flat like the random maps, with different eight of the ground so that some regions have a strategic advantage, and maybe the game will be less tactical and more strategic by doing so. Sadly I think the community isn't willing to make new units and commit changes to the game. I appreciate your words, I really tried to explain the problem the best I could. Still ,I like to think ,and I hope, that I didn't get attention because I couldn't explain myself well enough ^^, if it's the case, just ask and I'll try to find better words. I hope the real reason isn't because the community isn't willing to commit the few changes, having the fear that they would take too much effort to be balanced and such, I'm sure they wouldn't take much work to be committed, and I'd work myself hard to get out the best balance possible. I think this is not the case though, since implementing the capturing feature is far more ambitious than doing the few tweaks I suggested. A little tweaking of civic center and barrack units spawning time could make the game much more strategic, deep and enjoyable, with little effort. Anyway I think the post was good enough to get a conversation and an exchange of ideas going, I cant stand a chicken engine gets more attention ^^ But maybe I was too ambitious, maybe I should've asked for this in the first place: I have little familiarity with javascript, but it might be enough to make a mod myself, since I think it would only take changing some already existing strings numbers, so if anybody can help me get started i'd appreciate (maybe hint me a guide or give a bit of explaination on where to find those strings I was talking about) , i'd like to give it a shot. Mario.
  11. Yeah, A16 ,as A17 and A18 had only one viable strategy. Which means that the early game , say the first 10 minutes, were exactly the same in every game. Those 3 Alphas (which I played a lot) had each one an optimal strategy (the best strategy possible, which leads to the best result given the goal of winning the match), which didn't depend on what your opponent was doing, and that's why scouting has never been used as a strategic tool (since whatever your opponent was doing, the best strategy to counter his plan was always the same) and ultimately there's never been strategic thinking involved. As I said earlier, I played 0ad a lot. It has been the first Rts game I ever played, and i fell in love with it instantly, it was like discovering chocolate and candies at 20 years of age. I wanted to learn the most I could , so I played with the best players, watched their videos, spectated their games and so on, just for the sake of getting better at the game, because i loved it. I got some understanding of the game mechanics and ultimately became good myself, so whenever i say 0ad is a bad game, it has no strategy involved or that it's broken, I'm belittling myself first as a player more than anything else, I'm not attacking and criticizing the game because i can't play it , which is the kind of reason which, sadly, leads to most of the "constructive critics" ( more or less subconsciously) the game gets by players (just take as an example a16, where everybody was hating on rushing , just because they were frustrated of losing by it, and not because it broke the strategic aspect of the game). I'm criticizing the game even though I can play it, I'm saying rushing is not a sensible choice even though I 'm a macro oriented player who likes to boom, I'm saying rushing is not a good strategy even though the few times i tried to rush in a18 I always succeeded also against very strong players. I'm doing so because I still love the game, and I'm trying to give back all the good things the game gave me, I haven't got the skills required to fix bugs and such things, so I can only share my intuitions to improve the game, which derive from a quite deep understanding of it. So if i decided to write this post, it's because I thought that there was no awareness about this problem, and nothing was being done in order to solve it. The most important thing is to fix the overcompensation that happened from A16 to A17 in regard to rushing. Simply reducing the civic center damage output, might be enough, and the 3 strategies might find a balance. In addition to that ,I hinted how giving the barrack a more distinct role could add a lot of depth to the game. I understand how the big potential of this small change is hard to understand, that most people don't get to a certain level of play to even know what booming rushing and turtling mean, and that most of the community and the volunteers participating to the craft of the game are involved in art works , programming and such, but the gameplay experience has the same value of the above for the success of the project. I can't make a mod myself to show you my plan, if I could I wouldn't have even made this topic in the first place. The most I can do is to share my ideas with those who can. As always, I 'm happy to hear your feedback and so on. Mario.
  12. Capturing could be of course a nice feature, and the more nice features we can implement, the better. But, as the game is balanced out, it doesn't respect the mechanics of all the good Rts out there. Other Rts are balanced in such a way that the player can choose wich strategy to play once the game starts, and those strategies can be grouped in 3 categories, you can play greedy, you can play defensive or you can play aggressive. And these 3 strategies counter each other, being greedy means you invest your resources into getting a strong economy, wich will eventually fuel a strong army later.And I say eventually, becouse someone who plays greedy can be punished by someone who is aggressive, someone being aggressive, will spend his resources into making an army early, and this army must be able to kill an undefended greedy enemy.But if you play aggressive and you encounter an opponent who plays defensive, meaning that he gets an army soon himself, and in addition to that he gets some static defenses up, the aggressive player loses , becouse the defender has static defenses and the shortest rally point for reinforcements.if you play defensive tho, and you encounter someone who plays greedy, you lose, because a greedy player will soon overwhelm you with his superior economy, while you invested your money in soldiers that were basically idling waiting for an aggressor.Since there are these mechanincs in any good Rts, knowing what your opponent is planning is crucial, so scouting is part of good Rts. Problem with 0ad now, is that being greedy cant be countered, and thats partly because 0ad uses the citizen/soldiers system , which is a lovely idea, but is not balanced and is not easy to balance to work with the mechanincs described above, and mostly because attacking and defending balance is broken, defending is easier than attacking, and once you get to a decent level of control while defending, there's nothing fancy the attacker can do to turn things around. If game stays as it is now, it's gonna still be enjoyable for new players or for those who just play for fun once in a while, it gives you a nice experience, you can make a cool army, get big coreographical clashes , artworks are nice and so on. But once you get to a certain level of play, the only viable strategy becomes 1 (being greedy, booming), all games look the same, and the winner is basically the player who gets the spawning advantage ( getting some extra berries in your territory age 1, getting mineral closer to your base, easier to secure for you once age 2). The few tweaks I hinted , aim to make game strategical, trying to balance the c/s system ( first time ever i think?do other games use this?) to respect canons of modern Rts (the canons that make some Rts become a profession), ultimately implementing decision-making and strategy part of the game, while still keeping the game enjoyable at lower levels of play of course. Now once you get good at it, game gets boring, learning curve is very short when it comes to understanding of the game, strategic choice and mindgame. Also TheMista pointed it out in one of the games we played, he made me think more on the subject and i have to say he was very right. Again, if you need more explaination im happy to give more details and rephrase whatever you want, if you can prove me wrong i'll be happy to be proved wrong. Just please dont ignore the topic, because this game has potential and we must be far-sighted. The game can be much more. Without doing much. Mario.
  13. Hi guys, with this post, I try to share my ideas on how to improve the game strategic aspects. The 0ad player set of skills, requires now macro and tactical control. Simply, get the biggest army , get the metal of the map (wich leads to another problem, spawning points advantages, being very high in random maps. On the next post x)), get the best position in the engagements. Strategy isn't involved. If you have doubt about this, ask yourself these questions: Do you ever ask yourself what's your opponent thinking of doing?(or, what is he thinking you're thinking he's thinking? And so on, look for metagame http://it.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=metagame )How important is scouting?(is it important at all?)Personally , I think scouting is only important to keep control of enemy troops movements (tactical tool), and strategies viable are very few and don’t counter each other well , booming reigns supreme (boom son, and hope your opponent boomed less than you). /------------------------------------------------------------------/ Ok, now a bit of explanation. As 0ad is now, rushing → booming → turtling → rushing doesn't work. (→ means “beats”) Booming and turtling are too similar, and rushing is not a viable option. (In the spoiler I try to explain why). In a few word, a good defender who boomed ,beats an as good rusher, so rushing doesn't counter booming. I underlined “good defender” because is not an easy task what he has, he needs to have enemy cavs under control, have wood workers spread the most he can ,and be very concentrated because just missing the cav approaching to your wood workers and not retreating them in time, means the blitz will be deadly, and you lose those wood workers. On the other hand, the attacker can only rely on opponent's mistakes to get the advantage out of the rush. To fix this, it's imo essential to lower cc firepower and/or range, I suppose it was increased from a16 to a17 to make things easier for defender against skirm cav rush, in addition to actually nerfing skirm cav, a bit of a over-nerf to rushing imo. Other fixes to try delineate better rushing booming and turtling could be differentiating citizens and citizen/soldiers more. Lowering females health (they have same armor and health as ranged units in age1), so that they die fast, in addition they flee once hit ,so is very frustrating trying to kill them with less than 20 rangeds. And their recruit time: make the time bonus for batches of women bigger, so that if someone commits to booming (which revolves around doing big batches of women) he gets a decisive advantage on someone who plays safe and does the most men and the least amount of women possible.Doing this few changes, would improve the game strategical aspect, and encourage scouting. What you get from the current balance ,are long and boring heavily macro oriented games, without the possibility of early aggressions. /------------------------------------------------------------------/ But here is the more meaty idea, ( which might work in synergy with the above or be an alternative) what I'm suggesting aims to make strategy and metagames the core of 0ad ,without the need of changing units balance, but instead with a small change in the structures balance. CC producing soldiers slower (or not at all) than how a barrack does : this way ,coming in with fewer skirm cav before enemy has a barrack would be a viable option, and most important ,it would incentive scouting, going for a rush would require an early barrack, so once you scout it, you have an idea of whats in your enemy's mind, and given your mindgame intuition, you might be right...or maybe you're being bluffed...maybe you should scout more...but this would mean sacrifice your macro...( an early barrack,given its cost ,would also mean that you cant have a fast housing for big early groups of women, and therefore you aren't going to boom).All this, might require lowering men wood cost. Needs testing. This minor tweak would imo improve the game experience a lot , more strategies, more build orders (now all BO look the same! Rushing, booming, turtling: barrack pops at 6 minutes if you haven't got extra berries or fauna, and houses ,houses ,houses), more scouting. Keep in mind , many of the ideas I explained come from comparing 0ad to other most famous Rts ,mostly starcraft2. Ok , I hope I could explain myself. If something is unclear, I 'll be happy to explain, and if you like what you read, I have many other little concepts to beef up and sharpen the ideas above, but the post is already too long....so maybe a part 2 if you like. Mario.
  14. Yeah z, dont get me wrong, i was talking about auron, your intervent was right on spot and necessary. I was inaccurate on the first post, and i meant to specify on that regard. Sorry if i sounded unpolite, but i was kind of irritated at Auron arrogance. The meaning of this thread is to contribute to the game with our ideas knowledge and opinions, dont discredit other people ideas just becouse at a first read they sound "weird" or wrong to you, rather ask for further explaination, or enrich the topic with your own reasoning around the subject. Word comunication is not something perfect (how z misunerstood me is an example) so be cautious on your intervents and maybe read twice before giving your take.
  15. I see that but i dont understand why this is a cons to lowering training time of women. I mean, calling it a downside of lowering time of women recruitiment means not understanding the point of why lowering it.
  16. 1_ how can something be OP if accessible to all civs in the same manner? 2_ i dont train women with houses, becouse from houses a woman takes 30 seconds to train (versus 8 seconds in the cc). I prefer investing the resources of the tech in better things, and i dont usually spam women age 2, i spam men. i dont personally understand this comment. Recruiting time for women should imo be the lowest possible (wich doesnt need to be much lower than 8 seconds maybe) in terms of playability. Their training time has already been lowered to 8 seconds, result being a more varied approach to early game you can have, you can chose a safe approach to early game, with early men and less women, and hit 130 pop at min 10 with 50 women. Or you can do more women( wich is risky, but still too hard to punish imo), hitting 160 pop at 10 min with about 80 women( you start spawning men very late with this approach, so a rush at about 7 mins would be deadly) Now, if women and men have same training time, the choice is easy, make men. The more the gap between women and men training time, the funnier, varied and important the early game, the more the strategies and also the harder the macro wich is very important too, increasing the learning curve might result in highlight creativity and create more and more playstyles. Lowering women health goes hand in hand with this idea. This is something that could be also easily tested in the balance branch too i think, and i'd be personally happy to do it.
  17. I dont understand why you think that cav shouldnt kill support units, even melees footmen should annhilate rangeds if not protected by melees, a sword cav is an armored dude running to you straight at 40 km/h with a sword, hitting you from 1 meter up your head, and still in the game it takes them the 10 hits to kill an archer, wich is basically just a dude with a bow and arrows. Of course you can use cav speed to harass, but that's only possible if they counter support units hard. Otherwise the defender can simply harvest and once cav is in sight, press H. Spearmen have 3x damage against cav for a reason.
  18. I like the feedback guys, and you have very nice ideas. I liked the stance idea particularly, couse it leaves open options to how to engage the fight: sometime is better to engage with stop button for example, and the stance idea leaves it viable.
  19. In big numbers not even skirm cav counters archers, 40 skirm cav vs 45 archers....archers win(atlas). And battles between slingers and skirmishers are even more clear,30 slingers vs 30 skirmishers, slingers save around 22 units. Ok hope you got my point, skirmishers are much weaker then archers and slingers. Anyway looks like we'll have a whole alpha to test it out x) I hope it wont kill the whole alpha gameplay, wich is really nice.
  20. Scythe i did many tests in the atlas : in low numbers (10rangeds+10 melees) you are right (autofocus problems dont start to kick in) skirmishers work better then without melees , the battle 10 arch+10spear vs 10 arch+10spear ended with the likes of 1 or 2 survivor onn one of the 2 sides( again i do repetitions couse of accuracy). I was putting the archers in such a way that their range advantage was exploited the most possible. In bigger battles(when autofocus is in favour of archers, the way i already explained) archers win ,even tho their melees companion die first. I went up to testing 75 archers + 45 melees vs 45 melees + 75 skirmishers (again with positioning) archers win saving half of the archers.
  21. Yeah, either get a button , or as you suggested even better, just let soldiers be first priority if in range.
  22. Why this? couse wasting your damage on women while enemy soldiers kill your own army, kills the game. 10 women in the middle of the battle field, between 2 armies facing each other, will suck on them all the fire. In the while, your men die under enemy fire. In a18, where rangeds vs rangeds battle are very fast, even 3 shots make a huge difference. Just test in the atlas. 15 archers vs 15 archers + 1 woman, the army with the woman wins and saves 7 archers on average ( archers have "accuracy" to be taken into account, so outcome is not always the same) And of course the more the women , the better. if women are 5, the winning side loses only 2 archers on average. This is something that can be easily exploited , but maybe also easily fixed. Can a command be added , so that soldiers will have greater priority over women, for your army to target? Mario
  23. I fear it might be too late, leper was already reluctant to commit new stuff yesterday ,since a18 is already being packaged and soon to be released (my technical language is very poor , i hope i didnt say any bs x) )
  24. Putting skirmishers in a defensive stance age 1 is weird to me...they could defend effectively with towers,but they should be an offensive unit since their low range and high dynamism ( also historically they were used as scouts and raiders i believe). And even if we accept this kind of gameplay with skirmishers, archers have active role, they'd have the initiative and could decide wich trail the game should have( im just writing as i think this concepts, i might be wrong maybe, only playing can tell. Not just this , but EVERYTHING ) I believe that you dont necesserely have to send your melees to battle, you can simply place them in front of your archers in passive stance and they'll suck damage, (wich is very very sad, but is the only thing they can do against rangeds) and be ready to block cav. I did some tests in the atlas: 15 sword cav kill 25 archers,saving 4 cav( wich is not enough in my opinion, cav should tear apart support units, but again this is just my opinion, game is playable as it is now too), but get destroyed by 30 archers. This is becouse rangeds have very high damage compared to all melees, so a few more archers increase the firepower a lot( the balance is achieved with armor stats, wich is high for melees and low for rangeds: a downside of this is that melees vs melees last ages without rangeds to support. I have to say i dont really like how balance has been achieved, maybe there were a more simple way, without loooong only melees battles and supershort only rangeds battles. Also, now melees can basically only tank in battle, while rangeds do dps: so melees do few damage by close-by and have high resistence, while rangeds do high damage from long distance; rangeds win 2 qualities to 1)
  • Create New...