borg-

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.

Some 0 a.d & mods mechanics in age of empires 4. - Collect food with cavalry/scout - Mongolian pack/unpack buildings - Towers seem to shoot arrows according to the number of soldiers garrisoned. - Can garrison units in ram and siege towers.

Basically any counter is historically wrong. historically javelin / spear / sword cavalry are the same unit, just like javelins of infantry after throwing darts come to melee fight. Particularly I have no problem adding a bonus for spear cavalry as well, the conception would be that sword cavalry can do much more damage to general units, but more vulnerable, and spear a unit with less attack power but more resistant. about javelin cav, you may not need a counter, because it already has a very high damage, I would just do what I proposed earlier, increase the attack, decrease the range and +2 pierce resistance.

Why not? catapults were operated by people, don't necessarily attack a lot of wood and iron. Anyway i think i will make a patch to increase the attack of the catapults and a little pierce resistance.

Even if you give a bonus vs archer to javelin inf too, not every civilization has javelins, so it will never work. A decent counter system will only work if you remove the collection capacity from combat units. Yes, it is less real and changes the whole concept of the game, but I think it would be a step forward for a.d, because many of the changes are stopped because it also affects the economy.

Yes, it is my preferred system, but it cannot be applied to 0 a.d. For 0 a.d I would use only necessary counter. How I think balancing for the future: Melee infantry with the same movement speed as ranged. This would already significantly help melee units to be more effective. Javelin cav/inf - It must be a unit with extremely high damage, but very vulnerable, changes that I would make: Range 30 > 24, Pierce Attack 16 > 20, Pierce amor 1 > 3. This makes them very strong with some melee unit in front, but the cavalry and also the melee infantry are more vulnerable if they are without a meat shield. It also makes it more durable against archers. Slinger - No changes. Archer cav/inf - Decrease accuracy 2.0 > 2.5. Spearmen inf - Should be more effect in battles. Pierce attack 2.5 > 3.0. Swordmen - Must be lethal when reaching your enemy, but more vulnerable to projectiles. Increase Hack Attack 5.5 > 6.5, decrease Pierce Attack 5 > 3. Pikemen - it must be very effective against melee infantry and cavalry, but very weak against ranged units. Increase Hack/Pierce Attack to 3.5, Hack Armor 10 > 8 and decrease Pierce 10 > 5. Spear cav - No changes. Sword cav - Bonus 1.25 vs ranged infantry.

I prefer the system ranged > melee > cav > ranged. For this to work, the skirmisher cavalry must have a bonus against ranged infantry, like https://ageofempiresonline.fandom.com/wiki/Sarissophoroi

The idea is to keep the tech just for cartage to diversify the civ, rank 3 ofc.

It's not just religion. It happens every day...

The project belongs to everyone. We opened discussion in the forum to differentiate civilizations, so you can help with your opinion and ideas.

Perfect!

In 21 seconds you can see some gameplay stuff, like minimap, interface, etc ...

This is not just the problem. If I am going to attack you, how will I know if you have collectors or soldiers? This mark on the soldiers must be permanent then, without having to select/click the unit

I don't know, i like how 0 a.d works now. my problem is that there must be a great differentiation between the models of men, because it is very difficult to know if it is a collector or a soldier. Should the gatherin rate be the same for all units now?

Remembering that we can bring the two patchs. Rank 2 + less training time (D3699) + less metal cost (D3665).

The ships are basically the same as the a23.

This is in my plans.

I am opening this topic to discuss the cost of citizen units. My idea is to standardize the cost of the units. Citizen melee and ranged infantry cost: 50 food and 50 wood. Cavalry cost: Javelin cavalry: 100 food 50 wood Archer, sword and spear cavalry: 100 food 30 wood 20 food. The intention is to ensure that the infantry is on an equal footing across all factions. On maps where you only have access to a metal or stone mine, slingers or swordmans can be a problem in late game. Javelin cavalary is the cheapest cavalry, costing only food and wood. The additional cost of gold for the strongest cavalry. A ptolomeu camel spam rush becomes a little more difficult. Spear cavalry can easily take down other cavalry at the beginning of the game, mainly javelin cavalry, so now it would cost a little gold, which in theory improves balance. The intention is also that also about more metal and stone for the research of techs and also to facilitate the training of mercenaries and champions. I would like everyone's opinion. Tnx and have a good day!!!

In fact my original idea was that only Gauls could have access to the forge in the village phase (I did it in my patch), I think it would be a great differentiation, with a historic backing to be a good rush civilization

I'm fine with 3rd level of upgrade. Would it be interesting to move the forge to the village phase then? This encourages an attack even earlier.

Really what I call a constructive criticism, thank you. I'm already working on some patches: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3677

An idea would also be to potentialize one or more existing bonuses for civilization.

Most of our changes had a historical context. I have always made it clear here on the forum that it is very important to have a historical foundation.

The problem is that you are able to maintain historical realism. Javelins for example were effective against heavy infantry and not long-range units, but either way it can be adjusted and I like how you think.

The balance cannot be heard by everyone, and that is logical. Each player has a perspective on what op is and what not. Yesterday player Melunises said that champions were unfeasible in this alpha, @vinme and others said no, he insisted that it was. Well that's his point of view, and if we follow his vision then we need to do something for champions. However, I proved to him in two 1v1 games that champions are very possible, so he understood. Balancing is done by the best players for that reason. When there is a constant complaint like in alpha23, slinger, then we know that something needs to be done because all players are complaining, at all levels. Developing open source games is difficult because each person has a "perfect" game vision. Anyway, we are working for a25, today I was talking to @ValihrAnt about some changes that were necessary for a25, and I would like to share. Pikeman and spearman need to have an counter vs elephants. Champion elephants need a hp reduction like 10%. Mercenaries need to cost a little less metal and maybe start at rank 2. Reduce the damage of towers a little or decrease the amount of arrows. Archers needs a little less accuracy, from 2.0 to 2.5. Ranged cavalry need to move a little faster (16). Units need reduction in training time mainly cavalry. 8 women 10/12 infantry and 14/15 cav? It is clear that these ideas are based only on a24. As a25 is built, some values must change.