Jump to content


Balancing Advisors
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by borg-

  1. Only gaia can defeat me anyway
  2. Some victories ofc, but nothing that in my view justifies a bonus. They were feared on land not at sea like the Athenians for example, although a Persian financing technology for some warships would be very interesting.
  3. 1- I think we can give the medium warship a slow move speed, as they weren't as fast as the others, this would add historical realism and would likely solve the balancing problem. It could also cost a little more wood and less gold. 3- Fire ships has been nerfed enough, you just have some micro that can take it down without taking damage. 4- What you mean, lighthouse already reveals an area around it and no shoreline, since alpha 24. 5- Spartans lost tough naval battles in your history, why should there be any naval bonuses?
  4. Most competitive players are not playing the game often, so it's not being built for competitive players. The fact that we don't have such diverse civilizations is because there is no design plan and someone to command it. I've even started working on it, but it takes a lot of time, and unfortunately I don't have my free time to spend on it anymore, Besides that the part of 0.ad community is extremely ungrateful. You spend hundreds of hours working on various improvements, to find two or three problems/errors and post on the forum all the time when the new alpha is bad. I said several times that a24 was a work in progress and that a25 would be much better, but they continued to talk a lot of crap. Well the "end" result of the work is an alpha25 much better than alpha24 and 23 as I said. Lack of patience is a problem, especially for those who don't move a finger to help with anything. Basically the alpha 24 - 25 was mostly build by me and @Nescio (gameplay/balance), but we're not working on it concretely anymore, so if no one else is interested in this, players are destined to play with these civilizations / gameplay / balancing for many years, like that how was a23 sling + ram.
  5. AOE4 is good but doesn't use full potential. I think one year after the release it is using 100% potential, and I think it will be a great game for a few years. Developers gave up realism and graphic quality in exchange for visibility, and most of that is due to the scenery/hills, so not having any buffs/debuffs is a bit dumb in my opinion. They are listening to the community, and should be working hard on it by the 28th.
  6. @Jofursloft @chrstgtr @ValihrAnt @Feldfeld @Pudim @badosu and others, come.
  7. @Gurken Khanwhat we have now is not what i expect. We have victory by wonder, but we don't have a sacred place on the map that if controlled for a few minutes wins the game, it's not even close to the same thing. We don't have treasures on the map, we only have a few resources played across the map, no need to fight for them, just use your horse and collect everything before your opponent. It needs to be more complex and fun. I also want to say that these features shouldn't just be available on some specific maps.
  8. I'm referring to special buildings, buildings scattered around the map that you can capture to win the game, for example. What I mean is that 0 a.d doesn't challenge you to leave your small town because you have everything you need in a small piece of territory. What if we had structures that would give you victory if captured? Or nomadic tribes capable of producing mercenaries very quickly and cheaply to surprise their enemy, or even valuable treasures that give some sort of military/economic advantage if captured. This would encourage another style of play besides the snowball.
  9. The biggest problem with 0a.d is that you can easily reach your population limit without having to do anything. No need to expand territory, no special buildings, nothing, all the resources you need are in your reach. I think making the territory something more valuable would be interesting, also future additions of camps to ally, treasures among others, can make this snowball diminish.
  10. If I'm not mistaken the main Kushite economy came from husbandry, if confirmed, I would give a bonus to the animals in the corral, such as increasing the total meat of the animals for example and a 4° metal/stone tech. For athenas i would also change their team bonus to -50% and include all ships including fishing boats, and would give some unique new technologies (civilization with more unique technologies).
  11. Imagine that you have gained an advantage of 30 soldiers against your enemy who is playing Sparta, and your economy is slower because you are producing skiritas. In the time you need to build a new center, it has a chance to equalize in number, and even make a sneak attack on your new center under construction or even on other strategic areas. Colonies would also have a population increase, less of course. It would also make the fight for territory something real and necessary.
  12. Just an idea. wouldn't it be interesting to avoid snowball, give a population increase by cc? For example, if you are playing 1v1 with max 300 pop, then houses and other buildings can give you max population 200, the rest can only be achieved by building new ccs (like 50 max pop per cc). I think this would encourage more expansion/fighting for territory.
  13. a24 had to be done this way, there was a lot of inconsistency in the code, status of units/constructions, lack of standardization, historically incorrect, etc... From a24 onwards, the work can be done correctly, as we saw in a25, a considerable improvement.
  14. For the balance I would work on the bonus/team bonus civ and heros aura.
  15. If the problem is elephant and siege tower then just change those units.
  16. Because it’s unrealistic to have these units moving fast, besides that a24 was asked very hard for rams to be slower.
  17. my idea for pikeman is a unit with a high hack damage absorption and strong hack / pierce attack, but slow and weak against projectiles/ranged units. Historically is more correct.
  18. If I remember, not only Stoa is historically wrong, but those mercenaries too. Perhaps changing the name of these units is necessary to historically correct mercenary unit. A specialist in Greek culture would be interesting here.
  19. The changes usually have a reason. Stoa and the champions were removed not simply because we thought it would be better that way, but because they are historically wrong. We seek to emphasize the historical precision in the changes to a24.
  • Create New...