ValihrAnt
-
Posts
144 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by ValihrAnt
-
-
Are sword cav op? Or are mercenary sword cav op? There's a huge difference between them. Mercenary sword cav beat spearmen confidently. Normal sword cav get destroyed by spearmen, even gaul sword cav get beaten by spearmen very well. There's a reason why you don't see people doing sword cav with the Athenians, Britons, Mauryas often.
-
3
-
1
-
-
The currently made patches:
1) Macedonians: Storehouse technologies are researched instantly ⚙ D4234 [gameplay] Macedonian bonus - Instant storehouse technology research time. (wildfiregames.com)
2) Romans: +5 Worker carry capacity. ⚙ D4239 [gameplay] Roman bonus - Increased resource carry capacity (wildfiregames.com) Could easily be switched for an increased wood gather rate.
3) Kushites: Fields, Fishing ships, and Corrals are 50% cheaper. ⚙ D4233 [gameplay] Kushite bonus - cheaper farms, corrals, fishing ships. (wildfiregames.com)
4) Athenians: Faster technology research time. More of a military bonus than an economical one. ⚙ D3675 [Gameplay] Athenian bonus - faster technology research time (wildfiregames.com)
Quote- Britons: instant phase research and -30% cost (no historical explanation yet: its just a fun and powerful bonus)
Instant and cheaper seems a bit overkill. Could also just return the bonus they had in a23, where many buildings gave additional population space. The problem there is that the bonus just existed without any explanation and would have to come up with a name and history.
Quote- Gauls could be upgraded to -30% blacksmith costs.
Like on top of their teambonus? I don't want to do pure military bonuses for now, just economy or hybrid. The Gauls could actually get a woodcutting bonus as they did have immense forests.
On 10/09/2021 at 7:49 PM, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:Athens: slingers -10 stone or metal cost (if in future there is champion slinger: -5 of both). OP mining history
They do actually already have a mining bonus but it's quite trash, which is probably why I had completely forgot about it. The problem is it only starts in P2 and thus doesn't end up being as impactful. Moving it up to P1 makes sense to me.
On 10/09/2021 at 7:49 PM, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:Seleucids: -20% cc cost could be extended to barracks and stable for whole team. And upgraded to -30%. I feel it is less strategic to have -10% on all technologies because it is not specific enough.
I don't want to touch their teambonus right now as I feel like territory and CC costs need a bit of an overhaul in general but that's a different thing. The tech bonus hasn't been done either as I wasn't really sure about it.
-
1
-
@borg- actually playing?
@DerekO do the games remain bo3 as they become higher stakes? So semi-finals and finals still played as bo3?
On 02/07/2021 at 4:53 AM, DerekO said:Dates will be September 2nd - October 15th (estimated 1 - 2 rounds every Friday and Saturday)
Is the predicted date based on 1 round every week?
-
I made this thread with the intention of getting ideas and feedback for potential economy bonuses for the current civilizations.
Currently nearly all civilizations lack a direct economy bonus. Ptolemies and Athenians are the only ones with a direct bonus. The Romans, Ptolemies, and Iberians have their team bonus working as an economy bonus. Consider that the bonuses should make sense historically and have a name and description. That's the really hard part for me and I hope this thread will help avoid me making a patch and then a bunch of revisions for it.
The currently made patches:
1) Macedonians: Storehouse technologies are researched instantly ⚙ D4234 [gameplay] Macedonian bonus - Instant storehouse technology research time. (wildfiregames.com)
2) Romans: Economic and Military structures +2 population bonus ⚙ D4309 [gameplay] Roman bonus - structures +2 population space (wildfiregames.com)
3) Kushites: Pyramids buildable in Phase 1 and with a reduced cost, build time. (150Stone from 300 Stone + 100 Metal; 120 build time from 200) ⚙ D4280 [gameplay] Adjust Kushite Pyramids to be more used (wildfiregames.com)
4) Athenians: Faster technology research time. More of a military bonus than an economical one. ⚙ D3675 [Gameplay] Athenian bonus - faster technology research time (wildfiregames.com)
5) Seleucids: Farmstead farming boost aura(+15% in 20m aura) ⚙ D4325 [gameplay] Seleucid bonus - farmstead farming boost aura (wildfiregames.com)
-
4
-
-
Do pallisades really need a big change? The way I see it is that pallisades are there to buy you some time and if you want to really protect an area you build the proper city walls. There could be an upgrade to increase the hack armor of buildings to deal with late game melee units.
Maybe it's just me but rather than sword cavalry being op, I'd say it's players not knowing how to counter them.
1) It is getting better now but players don't seem to realise that spearmen counter cavalry. So many people just don't make spearmen and then are surprised how a unit that's pretty much intended to counter ranged inf actually does well against ranged inf.
2) Not adapting to the situation. After the 2nd raid on farm economy you should probably start thinking about how to protect it.
3) Blacksmith upgrades or civ bonuses. Most often the cavalry player will have made significant investment into blacksmith upgrades and will do the rush with Gauls or Carthaginians who have stronger sword cav. The defending player hasn't made any such investment making the cav seem stronger than they really are.
4) Cavalry require more investment than infantry. The defending player should easily outnumber the cavalry as the attacking player has to also keep investing into eco.
This game against Jofursloft demonstrated these points really well. We were even before going into P2, but he quickly pulled ahead in population due to not needing to set up extra farms and stables. He further walled off his farm economy before I could get even a single raid in and prioritised strong unit production making it impossible for me to find any significant damage. After pulling ahead in population he just got a strong push going and there's nothing I can do as investing into cavalry just set me too far back.
It does also partly come off to how insane the woodlines in most biomes are where you can have 20k+ wood in a single forest and can get well into the late game before needing to start gathering wood elsewhere. It also kills the importance of map control which hurts aggression.
-
4
-
-
This is an innovative new feature too, right? Atleast I don't remember seeing something like this in any other RTS game I've played. It's really cool and definitely something to play around with.
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, alre said:1 hour ago, ValihrAnt said:Expand
Are they really overcorrected? The only change for damage output is an increase in spread which can be canceled out by a blacksmith technology. Some of the archers civs also have a tech for extra range.
Looking at this it seems quite clear that archers are still in a very strong position. I only did some tests now without upgrades to quickly verify that my numbers are similar and if data with upgrades is true then I'd rather think that archers deserve a further nerf rather than a buff. Also keep in mind that archers can easily provoke a fight and then never engage by simply running back to defensive buildings. In defensive situations in general they are far superior to other ranged units due to their range advantage and thus being able to fight from far behind a fort or CC.
P.S. You can't have archers with equal movement speed to units with lesser range. That's how you get the a23 camel archers. It wasn't a disaster for a24 because the major turn times made it impossible to hit and run, and only meant that overextending with archers was impossible to punish.
lol. how comes than than camels are broken again, and archers are in a worse position than in A23?
Camels are nowhere near to their strength in A23. They now have lower move speed, less range and less accuracy. So javelin cavalry can actually catch them now and towers can actually range them, that's quite a big difference. To make it even worse, they can't harass food without being ranged by the CC anymore too.
And the same thing about archers. How can you say that they are worse than in A23 when just about everything is better for them now? Their lowered range and accuracy are remedied by technologies and otherwise they've got more damage, more speed, skirmishers being slower and no phase up bonuses which gave extra time for opposing units with greater dps to close the distance. As I said, I'd be more worried about them still being by far the strongest ranged infantry unit.
-
Are they really overcorrected? The only change for damage output is an increase in spread which can be canceled out by a blacksmith technology. Some of the archers civs also have a tech for extra range.
55 minutes ago, a 0ad player said:
Looking at this it seems quite clear that archers are still in a very strong position. I only did some tests now without upgrades to quickly verify that my numbers are similar and if data with upgrades is true then I'd rather think that archers deserve a further nerf rather than a buff. Also keep in mind that archers can easily provoke a fight and then never engage by simply running back to defensive buildings. In defensive situations in general they are far superior to other ranged units due to their range advantage and thus being able to fight from far behind a fort or CC.
P.S. You can't have archers with equal movement speed to units with lesser range. That's how you get the a23 camel archers. It wasn't a disaster for a24 because the major turn times made it impossible to hit and run, and only meant that overextending with archers was impossible to punish.
-
2
-
-
I did some quick messing around with formations and found a new issue now. When I unit attack move or patrol when in formation, only one of the units in the formation will attack while the rest continue moving onwards, right through the enemies. Attack move and patrol without formation seems to be just fine though.
-
3
-
1
-
-
A very minor issue that we found for the Islands map, probably also happens on other naval maps, biomes with grass (India, Savanna) have it overlapping into water.
-
3 hours ago, LetswaveaBook said:
the tower had 3 slinger garrisoned but lost loyalty. I think this is the result of celtic structures being easier to capture.
Nah, it happens with anything in Phase 1. You can capture a barrack and you will lose capture points unless you garrison 4 or more units.
-
2
-
-
@mysticjimCould you update the first post with the new test versions? Got people downloading the old versions and causing OOS and confusion when trying to playtest. Thanks.
-
2
-
-
41 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:
Edit: what would the balancing fix be? Make melee units faster? That seems like it might have unintended consequences against inf.
What the patch does is just make them play the anim longer before moving again.
41 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:Also, if this bug was already present in a24 then the fact that we are just now learning about it indicates that it isn't a huge/common/frequent problem.
A24 had the issue of cav play just being very weak which of course does lead to them not being used and stuff like this not being noticed. A25 from what I've played is more aggressive and cavalry are a more viable option so it should be more visible.
41 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:For balancing reasons, I prefer the left version, which I understand is the current SVN setup. Right looks like it will be a big nerf to melee cav in cav fights and allow units like archer cav to too easily escape.
In normal fights it doesn't change anything, just in chasing. Unit bumping has made melee better able to chase so this should be a pretty fair trade off.
-
There is also an existing solution, just not available on most maps. Ambush and Frontier have Random Group team placement option which really mix things up on player locations. The teams are still together but they're spread around the map much more randomly and suddenly the points of interest change from game to game and can be all over the map, instead of players always funneling down the sides with the usual spawn locations.
It's also great for 1v1s as then you actually have to put some thought into trying to scout the enemy. Currently I can just click on the other side of the map and be done with it.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Player of 0AD said:
Alternative Suggestions:
- remove the free starting elephantI'd much prefer to give other civs bonuses rather than remove existing unique bonuses.
I do agree that currently the Mauryas only have 1 valid hero choice but that's something to be worked on for the future
I guess another thing, I find it interesting how fertility festival seems to be thought of as a good early boom option. Maybe I haven't been able to utilise it to its full pote tial but I only really find it useful in late game 1v1 situations where you need to add more farms while continuing nonstop soldier production. Otherwise it just feels worse than a basic boom with barracks.
-
3
-
1
-
-
49 minutes ago, andreassadi said:
OOS (Out of Sync Error) potentially with differing versions of A25. Afterwards, the game is unplayable and all movement freezes. This post was requested by @ValihrAnt.
More specifically, we had an initail oos due to someone with a different revision joining but the weird thing was that after he left and we resumed the game we immediately had another oos with no player listed and the game freezing immediately after, which meant that we had to start a new match. Don't have the oos dump anymore as we had another oos in the next game and I didn't think to back it up, so I don't know how much can be done about it or if it is any important to fix as it seems quite rare, specific and hard to replicate.
-
Just now, wraitii said:32 minutes ago, ValihrAnt said:
Played a game on 25760 and my sword cavalry had issues hitting cavalry archers that were retreating. They'd get in range, start attacking and then stop as the enemy had ran outside of their attack range(?).
You mean the melee Cav thta's attacking the retreating camels? It seems to me they're actually hitting, it's only the animation that's cut short.
Yep. I didn't go to replays to check if they actually hit as we were right about to start the next game but the lack of sound and the cut short anim put me off there. Would be nice if just atleast the sound played as then you'd have confirmation that something did happen with the attack despite the animation being cut in half.
-
1
-
-
Played a game on 25760 and my sword cavalry had issues hitting cavalry archers that were retreating. They'd get in range, start attacking and then stop as the enemy had ran outside of their attack range(?).
-
Just now, wraitii said:26 minutes ago, ValihrAnt said:
In regards to the autotrain thing, I really don't see a problem with it having the same efficient implementation as autociv. Batch training means that it won't be as efficient as queing units manually. If the game didn't have batch training then it'd be advantageous over manual training.
FYI the current autoqueue will re-use batch training if it's been setup.
Yeah and it doesn't have the situational awareness to adjust the batch size appropriately depending on any outside factors.
-
1
-
-
In regards to the autotrain thing, I really don't see a problem with it having the same efficient implementation as autociv. Batch training means that it won't be as efficient as queing units manually. If the game didn't have batch training then it'd be advantageous over manual training.
I suppose it will lower the skill floor but it certainly won't lower the skill ceiling.
-
2
-
-
It only forces same amount of starting metal and stone every game, food is random each time but the total amount for each player remains equal. Being able to have equal food per team and not just player would be a cool addition too.
-
There already is the balanced maps mod which does this and more.
Was very used in a23 but didn't really take off for this release. Probably comes down to it not being on the ingame mod downloader and a few specific people not being bothered to push for it to be more widely used as their map gen rng is through the roof.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Quote
Edit: though I wasn't particularly aware this was possible in A24
It definitely feels much less frequent than it was in a23, but that might also be down to Hannibal not being around for his antics and inspiration to others to replicate it.
On playtesting A25 units seem to bunch up a lot closer than in the current release and it can get quite difficult to tell how many units there are, but stacking doesn't seem possible beyond 2 units.
Also, I managed to get a bug @wraitiion r25745. Basically, I can get units to switch from their normal walk speed and animation to the running speed. So I can move across the map much quicker or have gatherers move at hyper speed. The way to replicate is to set units to formation, click them around in the middle of the formation and move them to no formation whilst units are in the running animation. The speed remains after attack move or other kinds of orders, garrisoning.
-
2
-
-
15 minutes ago, maroder said:
@ValihrAnt About the biomes: would it help to tweak the resource values depending on the biome? So that trees and bushes in biomes that have only few of them have even more wood and the ones in india could have less, compared to the situation now. Could that help to make them more attractive for MP?
It would certainly help on improving performance at the cost of removing some identity of the biome. India gives off a really cool and unique vibe compared to the others, at the cost of performance. The biome is similar to what Jungle is currently. Fine for 1v1s and small tgs but with more players the performance drop compared to the usual is very noticeable. Can certainly try and mess around with the tree resource value and spawn count, but I'd prefer for the biome to keep its identity.
-
1
-
1
-
Economy bonus ideas
in Balancing Discussions
Posted · Edited by ValihrAnt
An idea that seems interesting to me is to adjust the Kushite Small pyramid to work as a more unique economy bonus, by @LetswaveaBook. Currently it is a P2 building with a decent cost and build time, unfortunately it's rare to see more than one built anywhere else than the farming economy. Moving it to P1 with a reduced cost, build time and possibly range adjustment could be really interesting. It's a bonus that requires initial investment but in return can affect every resource, another weakness is that in a rush it can be captured and destroyed by the enemy. My initial idea is 100 Stone cost, 120 sec build time and 50m Range.
Any thoughts on this?