Grapjas

@chrstgtrYou call it a simplification, i call what you do an overcomplication. Pretty much all elements you name are standard elements you need to take into account when playing the game and will come more naturally the better you get at the game. It's only made much easier because now you can attack groups. We don't have to agree though.

Welcome to rts games?

Obviously attack group is better than attack ground, i never doubted that. But do you really want to take away such skill/interaction from the game? It seems like you do, but honestly i don't and there are people on both sides. You say attack group requires micro and skill but i honestly doubt that in realtime, it would pretty much be a simple repaint of an area once in a while. There is pretty much no risk involved with attack group. There is no misusing attack group other than letting your ranged get eaten by swordsmen for example, which would be bad in all occassions, even without attack ground/group. Micro should give you an edge over your opponent, and attack group takes too much from it. You might aswell make it their standard attack behavior unless manually commanded otherwise. People who don't like micro will get balanced by elo tbh. Besides, units are clustered on the battlefield all the time, not just on choke points. A one time volley on a resizable circle attack ground would be a pretty useful thing to have imo, with the choice of a continious one with a combination of a hotkey (for all ranged units, just to be clear, not just archers). But with risk of misusing / poor judgement and without it being the new standard way to play. Attack ground will also give usefulness to formations whereas it wouldn't with attack group. Also attack group needs a heavier rebalance than attack ground but whether that's a problem or not depends on the balancing team.

Do individuals specifically get hit and die by arrows in total war? Never looked that closely to it. Otherwise it's probably just calculating the entire battalion as 1 hitbox and lets random soldiers die when the health drops of the battalion entity.

Can confirm this bug on build 26198. And seems to be accross all civs not just macedonians. It keeps increasing the more blacksmiths you add to the group too. @Purgator_ thanks for reporting. EDIT: blacksmith does this do any building that can produce units. Trac Ticket

Already checked if that was the case, but there is another user who was online yesterday with an underscore in the beginning and at the end of his name, his stats were fine.

@EsteveCould try running it as administrator.

Haven't encountered such thing yet. @Yekaterina Next time he complains can you ask if he gets errors when joining the lobby? Or ask him to post his issue here on the forum.

If i'm not mistaken, a projectile that lands within any footprint (the circle/square below the unit/building) counts as a hit. So a projectile missing the main target can easily hit his neighbour. I'm gonna have to say that i think "target units within area" sounds a little to strong and a little cheesy tbh. Whereas "attack area" can have it's niche and strategic moments where it can be usefull like firing at chokepoint or a clustered group while involving some risk to it. Which would infinitely be more effective (gaining efficiency the larger the army) than if your units would target 1 unit at a time and overkill them, when properly used. Which happens all the time with for example 20 Javelins attacking 1 unit while with attack area you could potentially hit alot more different units at the same time depending on when and how it's used. It also can be backed up a little by history when archers as a group didn't really precisely target individuals in decently sized battles but mainly focused on volley arrows into a group of enemies.

I mean it's a strategic availability to build more farms/traders to go for more elephants. That's alot and pretty much an unstoppable force at that point. Could make the cost lower for them as a more specialized civ for elephants, or with a unique exclusive tech. Nothing wrong with (trying to) keeping them logical though. Pierce weapons have a sharp point, whereas hack weapons has sharp sides, and crush is simply blunt weapons. Tusks don't have sharp sides (unless weaponized).

I noticed this too when modding it lol. Could also just make them cost alot of food imo, because it's not too hard to get a good food income. Say like 1000 food so that they won't be spammed like crazy. It wouldn't be too hard to mix an elephant or two into your army (depending on the flow of the game ofc). The damage type should probably be pierce (main) and a bit of crush because they headbutt and sidesweep targets. Maybe a tech upgrade that let's them hit 3 nearby units at once, but split the damage across enemies hit. It's on my to-do list for the mod (no eta though lol).

That is correct if with succesful you mean effective. It doesn't mean it has a 52% chance to succesfully attack a target. I agree, if anything, the stats for attack should be inverted. Elephants should be a shock unit, not a siege unit imo.

Pike men should have higher attack anyway, and need a minimum range from the target to attack. Making them either good 2nd rank frontline support, or in that case, make work of ranged shooting over them.

I think it would be a pretty good addition to the game.

2021-12-29 21-56-41.mp4 Rating only visualization.

It's not out of necessity but more of a fun way to represent rank and it being a small reward for the 1v1's you've been through. Though, there was an opinion that there are to many font colors going on (every player has a vastly different color) which kinda got me into looking into font-colors altogether. This could potentially bring it together a little more or at least develop a pattern (or it could still be to crowded for some). I get what you mean though, and there are probably like-minded people. So your opinion is noted. I also could consider making an option to enable/disable font colors in general.

To be clear, i'm asking everyone, not just developers In an attempt to improve the multiplayer lobby ui, i want to collect some opinions. You can find the related patch here and obviously is still a work in progress (what i'm about to ask hasn't been included yet). One of the ideas i had was to give players colors based on their rating. vid for reference as example: 2021-12-28 15-48-52.mp4 Now the question is, which colors would you like to see it change into depending on rating?* Right now it goes from Green (700) -> white (1200) -> Gold (1200-1999) -> Red (2500) in small increments (~every 25 rating the color will change, unless in the red zone) the higher the rating is. Please also vote in the poll. *One thing to also keep in mind is that there are player status icons that also have colors depending on what the player is doing like so: Thanks in advance. EDIT: I'm aware 1700-2000 doesn't change much, which i will fix. It's more of a showcase to give you an idea.

Massive war going on, dude in the down-left corner: "eyy im finna build a house over there"

I agree. Getting into installing SVN, Trac and Phab, can be frustrating, intimidating and time consuming. It's quite a bump you must get over before you can actually try contributing or feeling like you're actually helping (<- of which i'm often not so sure of myself).

@Yekaterina you can try disabling TLS Encryption under options -> networking / lobby

I think it's a pretty good idea and people would be grateful for it, in the worst case scenario it's a showcase thing and people can always fork the idea into something else. Just wondering why you're not doing it yourself because you pretty much seem to have it figured out already and are capable of making it. But now i'm also wondering why you want to let somebody else do it if you think it's going to be useless.

Why not make it yourself if it's so simple?

I said leans towards, not is You probably won't find an alpha thats more playable than 0AD, even plenty beta's get released in worst states and probably even fully released games. Besides adding new broken and unbalanced features/updates is something that released tripple A games do all the time. Not saying that should be the standard but it's just for comparison. The meaning of "released", "alpha" and "beta" definitely shifted alot with early access being a popular thing to do nowadays.

That's contradictory. If anything, 0 AD leans more towards beta than alpha.

Yes, this is the kind of mindset that would be great for every balancer to have, would even go as far as calling it a must-have.