Jump to content


Community Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Grugnas

  1. i attached the replay. I really don't know why did this happen. grainfields.zip
  2. Grainfields are really trivial because they have way bigger actor than their footprint / obstruction in vanilla
  3. thank you for the upload, now i am able to try out the mod. Roman army camp gives error and can't be built because of its EjectHealth and GarrisonHolder components. Also I am not sure why but there was a weird bug with women trying to build a grainfield. Despite it was full hp ( 300 / 300 ), it couldn't be gathered and women kept trying to build it as if unfinished.
  4. you can find all the units stats in the xml files on your computer just following the same link trac path from "0ad/binaries/" on your computer. https://trac.wildfiregames.com/browser/#ps/trunk/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates
  5. This is a snowball tactic. More units you have, more effective the harrassment becomes. Although the high mobile harrassment power, they can also destroy towers which is supposed to be the only counter to mid-long ranged cavalry. Their disadvantage into the slow hunting. The idea with archers is to have a high range support with low mobility ( for infantry) and lack in the economy aspect (they suck at gathering), i guess. EDIT: i agree that the citizen soldier system isn't enough satisfying, it could be extended. i.e. there could be gaia settlments to take control of their gaia habitants with at no population cost, enslave them to put them at work.
  6. I can confirm that ptols may be really op. actually this strategy is overkill and OP in early game and counterable by siege towers in late game. an elephant could destroy your siege towers tho. The point is that towers with their distance restriction and low damage ( or cavalry with high hp if you like) can't prevent cavalry raids which is lame and let cavalry monopolize the whole game in any phase and state.
  7. please consider also starcraft 2 which is imho a superb game I played AoEII in my childhood, a lot in single player only. Despite some tactical sneaky built barracks (AI likes a lot to build stuff in most disparate zones), i can't see the deal into control the wide map (matter of fact most of times AI build walls even faster than i could remember LOL) and i have the feeling that its not worth to use villagers to build mills far away from civic center in order to hunt deers. There are tons and tons of techs to research but I can't see concrete differences between civs if not for some and perhaps not very relevant civ bonuses. Also, I am skeptical on considering most of those technologies useful in a competitive environment ( i talk not knowing the competitive scene tho).
  8. 1) Formations fix in my opinion should have the max priority because those are an already implemented feature and could even be improved. A formation lock system would finally set a junction point between battalion addicted and micro-management fanatics. 2) a simple balance would make online players happier. ( is this a bad thing? i see many people saying that's not important. Can you then justify all the recent complain on the forum please? Words won't calm down them and me neither ) I want you to know that some people stopped to play this game because of the balance. Yes, people leave because of balance. Are you really sure that balance is not important even at this stage? that sounds kinda hypocrite from SP players and uncaring from "the guy in charge" who i guess want people to actually use his code and numbers, producing the exact opposite result. Making mods in order to balance the game ( monkey wrench included) is stupid as long as their main target are online players and most of people online or doesn't care at all or won't invest their time to download something they will use 1 or 2 times per month. 3) indeed gameplay can be improved, but please bear in mind that there is already a lot of not optimized stuff already. Thus a temporary balance and some civ revision would already improve the game. Indeed there is really the need of a lighthouse as reference to consider variants and additions to the already existing content, there is a lot of redundance into playing different civs and this goes fare beyond the balance. That's a matter of decision power, proper motivation and, actually, real interest on the gameplay subject.
  9. Afaik the last update was 2-3 years ago. women aren't able to repair ( and i may agree with that )
  10. The document is indeed interesting, but obviously not carried on and outdated.
  11. Although there isn't any official position for that ( despite i guess there are entire teams dedicated to that aspect of the game in AAA afaik ) i guess that it is a shared feeling that there is the need of a guide who doesn't go on with "self conclusive experiments" but has the common sense to change things with criteria in foresee of future sure changes.
  12. Basically yes because units are easy to train and sometimes happens to fight never ending battles because units are easy to be replaced in late game in "mainland like" maps at advantage of civs which take thr most of the advantage from building barracks. Actually natural counters remove the need of introducing odd explicit counters, between units at least ( i'd like to see such bonuses while using formation rather than plan introduction) . Managing resources could be more crucial. Taining and building time(thing that perhaps in delenda est is too strong, at least for infinite time to build grainfields) reduction perhaps would promote different approaches to the mere e units spam wars.
  13. I agree, the game is already too frenetic while managing army at moment and perhaps an overall build and training time reduction would be really nice.
  14. @shieldwolf23, my friend. What you are asking for is a totally separate game which would require much more time than what it already requires. I am sure that offline players will be more than satisfied with campaigns implementation ( whenever they will come ) because they reproduce historically accurate events with perhaps already built cities in games where hopefully quests will be introduced: build N temples trade X amount of resources in Y minutes build a Wonder before the enemy get TOT population. Which is different from having something like a Tribute resources per house, a totally new talent tree and something that could somehow also affect multiplayer game and that perhaps make no sense atm. But yes, something risk-like with Simulated battle in random generated maps and an economy system oriented to upgrade your army ( maybe civilization has something like that? i never played it ) mode would be also fun. ( still this sounds like a total different game too )
  15. As long as single players don't care about balancing, all I can tell you is that a proper diversifying of the civs requires time and testing ( thing that actually lacks in svn ) with no need to add new redundant content with just more exotic actors ( me in first line have been really impressed by Kushite actors and would like to see them in main version [ e.g. i don't know why ptol nubian archers changed skin color from black to white ]) . Probably the first step would be to let technologies occupy the mid row of the production queue panel because pair techs are a couple only ( 1 actually ) in order to give modders more room for more technologies in already existing buildings. Everyone wants more contents. AI simply emulate a human player, thus the rules that apply to single player is a natural consequence of a proper tested working "formula" in online matches. The main concerns about balancing is that monotone strategies kill the fun and totally obscure already existing stuff like palisades, walls and towers that may have a more relevant role in any level of skill. Beyond the fancy effect, having more buildings/units/technologies available during the game would make the games ( intended like diversity between different matches ) more fun and would let not 1, new civ, but 10 already existing civs benefit from it. So, why is there a need to add more fancy stuff if the one already implemented doesn't properly work and that may even have counter-productive effects? Basically most of the already existing civs are just "fancy looking" because they are bound to the phase 3 convenient rush and to the "common for all" build order. There isn't any official mod ( made of fact i started my own balance mod which is already difficult to try online ), just fan mods due the flexibility of the engine. Delenda Est is an interesting mod and, sadly, a huge lose for eye-candy seeker players, but arguing on a flame thread because of a modify decision in an alpha stage game is quite time wasting if not useless because someone should foresee changes, especially if those kind of changes aren't new paper.
  16. the reason why I don't get what you are talking about is because in order to play a game, you have to be at least two players. None forces you to use the same build order, but as long as it is the most efficient way to win, there is always a human player who will use it and people "hungry" for win who will copy (basically like in any rts). As long as none prevent you from "sim city" around in offline, I can't see the point. If you mean that some players want some construction and economical "more oriented" game ( let's say like roller coaster tycoon, sim city which aren't rts at all ), I can only guess that that's not the way the game meant to go at first by judging the fact that the game was actually developed from an AoE mod and not from a sim city mod. Still nothing prevent a "Second" Justus ascension with enough time to make a conversion mod in such a way. As said, most of "online" players (if you want to) talk about simple number tweaks that can be done in hours with the ability to change the game experience, completely different from new content that may require much more time. Don't want you to think that our "wishes" conflict, but you should consider to watch things from a realistic point of view.
  17. i guess that there are enough civs to have a variegate styles for all of them in the limits of the RTS genre. Probably using a relative movement speed makes the code easier to maintain even if i'd have some critique about it because it is supposed to be used for vision range also ( for example it would make sense to make difference between units and building classes instead of referring everything to the "primitive" unit / structure template which is probably ugly ). ( i am still trying to improve my communication skills ) Im sorry but i have to say that this totally makes no sense for many reasons: This is a game and, just like any other game, it is made of numbers. Far away from a visual novel. gameplay somehow implies balance. i thought that delenda est and other mods focused on aesthetics and "gameplay design". I still can't understand the difference between competitive online gameplay and casual offline if not for some aesthetic ( i take starcraft 2 as example) and some content relative to an hypothetic storyline. I guess that skirmish cavalry spam wins in offline games too. Online keeps the game alive as long as you have friends to play the game with. Online players have to deal with frustrating mechanics almost everyday because OP tactics get viral. basically someone could just let women deal 100 hack damage and let any civ being able to train any unit from any building. there you go with the possibilities Most of the balance discussions focus on taking the most of an already existent content and make it enjoyable without pretend too much ( which is kinda easy to do as long as the game is not finished ) from devs that perhaps have to deal already with not content relative stuff. Knowing how players approach to the game is also a good inspiration for new possibilities/choices, based ofc to a previously taken way.
  18. yep, ty for the tip. updated the previously uploaded file.
  19. Quick update to now carthage can build 1 embassy per type, for a total of 3 different embassies at same time.
  20. that's something i didn't understand how to fix. Elephant archer template inherit cavalry archer template but it removes cavalry class though.
  21. There was a feeling that mauryan elephant workers have a never unleashed potential due the long time required to train them from civic center resulting in a bottle neck when boosting economy, now mauryan elephant workers can have a proper role into economy aspect. Carthage, with their spear champion and limited embassies seemed to not benefit at all from the mercenaries advanced rank and feel a bit weak, thus now they have an extra boost with increased embassies limit and higher rank mercenaries. Update Mauryans can't train elephant workers from civic center anymore Elephant worker can build basic civic and economy structures and research economy technologies Elephant stable available in village phase Embassies limit count increased from 2 to 3. Carthage now can research a technology to upgrade mercenaries to Elite rank. All embassies share same cost and build time now.
  22. can't find a valid reason why only food costly units should have other resources than food as loot.
  23. afaik also elephant archers, healers and wardogs would be affected if you don't specify the class since they are promotable
  24. Any promotable classes (into Advanced and Elite) would be affected if not specified. ( wonder if an array could be used to contain all the affected classes in order to remove potential redundant lines)
  • Create New...