Jump to content

Palaxin

Community Members
  • Posts

    204
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Palaxin

  1. Like after 2 months of inactivity, -10 points each month?
  2. In the long term, what about a "resource hotkey" which toggles between normal view mode and a "resource view mode" where resources are highlighted? That would combine both realism and visibility...
  3. Maybe @Stan` can split the political part into a new thread in the offtopic section?
  4. The problem with this reasoning is that you can twist it to justify about anything. A community needs rules just as a society does. BTW I am kind of annoyed of the inflationary use of the word "-phobia"/"-phobic" for any kind of disagreement whether it is coupled with fear (the actual meaning of that word) or not.
  5. for more extreme gameplay see also for more historicality see
  6. You are probably right for multiplayer ranked and even non-ranked games in the current environment. When I played singleplayer I preferred custom made skirmish maps as many of the random maps feel too uniform and boring (from a visual perspective).
  7. Personally I like "imperfect" and asymmetric maps as they are more organic and natural. However, I understand there may be a different desire for tournaments or ranked games. Though according to the laws of statistics imbalances should even out for a greater number of games...
  8. Old but timeless... According to that I quickly climbed down the ladder in my life. However, today I consider such thinking an expression of hybris more than anything...
  9. Sounds like a good middle ground. So if there really are some missed units @Grapjas can think of, we can implement them here and there, but we can also have more generic bonuses. I don't remember who brought up the point earlier, but I can understand from a competitive point of view that it is very time consuming to first build the wonder and then wait until the technology is researched. So maybe the bonuses should be made available instantly after you selected them - we could still balance costs and build time of the wonder itself if necessary. That way the completion of the wonder itself feels impactful and not just a way of enabling further options in the future. EDIT: it was @chrstgtr
  10. I got that. I just cannot think of 13 units where each of them is new fits to their respective civilization (maybe you didn't mean that by unique) is so game changing that they deserve a wonder to be built Agree, we could integrate more utility units into the game. But I would expect more from a wonder than utility... Maybe you can list some, then I won't guess and misunderstand anymore... If you talk about my badge - I am glad I received it, but I'm still no dev team member and independently from that it is a bit out of place to derive work obligations from that... Furthermore, under economic aspects (value to effort ratio so to speak): the proposed technologies could be provided in a matter of hours... Whereas designing 13 new units is only possible if there is collaboration of several people (with most likely at least 1 dev team member)... As I said I wanted to provide a solution that is feasible in the current environment of gameplay/balance development. I have seen too many theories, wishes, proposals that just added to the pile because no one was there to implement them.
  11. The most iconic units are already in the game. E.g. it would be stupid to have Spartan hoplites only with a wonder, but there is (and should) not a better unit for Spartans than hoplites. Furthermore, new special units for each civ would need much more balance tweaking. My point was that depending on the special circumstance you are in game, you may not even profit much of a new special unit if it doesn't fit your situation and playstyle... I understand wonders could be made more exciting. I assumed to find a relatively simple solution that can be implemented and agreed within a relatively short timeframe, ready for the next release. I agree we lack changes on an overall perspective that takes the whole gameplay into account, but any attempts into that direction failed in the last years.
  12. I like the idea of more special technologies, but not of tying them to the wonder. Make them available in city phase and give the wonder a boost (better: a few choices) that will benefit you no matter what your situation is. Finishing the wonder should mean something like 75% winning chance when before it was 50%.
  13. Exactly! A 4th phase and special über technologies should be considered a special bonus granted by that wonder as a reward. This does not make wonder victory irrelevant...
  14. Honestly I am not that into the idea of recruiting enemy units. You can argue that this reduces civ diversity which is a problem right now...
  15. You mean something like über hoplites for Sparta, über elephants for Mauryans etc.? I fear that would be a bit too special. I want to make room for 2-3 choices so you can act according to your current circumstances. However I could imagine there are 5 endgame technologies and each civ can choose 2 or 3 out of them...
  16. if you ask me 0 A.D. should just incorporate Delenda Est totally
  17. What about instead of the population bonus, wonders allow you to research one of three (cf. heroes) possible endgame technologies that are designed to end a close match: economic boost: 1500 food, 1000 metal, 500 wood for women: +50% carry capacity and gather rate, +25% construction/repair/walking speed for citizen soldiers: +25% carry capacity and gather rate defensive boost: 1500 stone, 1000 wood, 500 metal for buildings: +25% HP, capture points and capture regen rate, +5 HP/s regeneration for units: +25% HP, +1 HP/s regeneration offensive boost: 1500 metal, 1000 food, 500 wood for units (including siege engines, ships): +30% attack and +15% speed
  18. probably this one: The idea was to implement counters purely by gameplay mechanics such as charging for cavalry, directional attacks, formations, camouflage etc. Many of these things would consume "stamina", that would regenerate slowly... Basically to implement counters by making combat more realistic... Many of these features are still in the official list of planned features, but honestly I do not see progress in that direction (may be also due to some programmers not active anymore that were willing to implement these features)... Yeah you are right... I prefer historic realism as well, my point was more to establish are clear counter scheme (that is clear/stable enough to not change overall strategies because of minor balance changes) true... I have to remind myself more often of that! I do not think there are "0ad players" in general... some care more about competition and gameplay, some more about history, some about city-building, ... The game will always attract different players but I think it should stick with its roots
  19. AFAIK many years ago there was an official decision to only use soft counters in 0 A.D. (no fixed attack bonuses). That already has changed. However, it's not always that intuitive. Intuitive, for me, would mean about (+ soft counter ++ hard counter): ranged infantry archer: + heavy infantry ++ light infantry - spear cavalry -- sword cavalry slinger: + light infantry ++ heavy infantry - spear cavalry -- sword cavalry javelin: ++ ranged - spear cavalry -- sword cavalry melee infantry spear: + cavalry - ranged pike: ++ cavalry - ranged - infantry sword: + spear infantry ++ pike infantry + siege -- ranged ranged cavalry archer: + heavy infantry ++ light infantry - spear infantry -- pike infantry -- spear cavalry javelin: ++ ranged - spear infantry -- pike infantry -- spear cavalry melee cavalry spear: ++ cavalry + ranged - spear infantry -- pike infantry sword: ++ ranged + siege - spear infantry -- pike infantry -- spear cavalry
  20. I agree. But I like the framing ornaments They would make a huge difference in 0 A.D. already...
  21. At this point I want to follow you and say Thank you! to the team as well It has never been my goal to earn a badge but I feel honored, well, let's say recognized!
  22. There will be less people agreeing with you on that than what you think there are people supporting A24. You may spread toxicity but the result is that you alienate people around you even if some may agree with your arguments. 0 A.D. has been declared (near) dead several times in the past and right now it rather seems the opposite. Development has increased and that won't change because someone feels the need to be disrespectful. It is obvious that not everyone can be happy with all changes, but everyone can participate in a respectful manner.
  23. For the number loving folks I present some up-to-date statistics regarding development of 0 A.D.'s Alpha and pre-Alpha versions. I am doing this for the purpose of information only and appreciate any work done by the development team so far. The exact numbers can be read in the changelogs wiki page. Enjoy!
×
×
  • Create New...