Jump to content

Feldfeld

Balancing Advisors
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    511

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    12

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Feldfeld

  1. Keep loosing single player

    in Help & Feedback

    Posted · Edited by Feldfeld

    1 hour ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    In this case isvinverse, back to fight.

    He also wants to send them back to work in the end but yeah, if he wants his soldiers to fight he can select them maintaining Alt and circling his economy, which will not select women.

  3. Isometric View Option

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    3 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    Well, the cfg in my isometric file mostly just pertains to the items needed to create the quasi-isometric view, so I don't think there would be much conflict there.

    Yeah when i wrote this part i assumed in my head that mods couldn't change local.cfg, i would need devs to confirm what is or not possible xd.

  4. Isometric View Option

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Feldfeld
    confused user.cfg and local.cfg

    13 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    Oops, basically I think it could be another "local.cfg" type file that doesn't overwrite anything. The user's local.cfg would be untouched and would itself be the "backup" if the custom file is turned off with the mod being turned off.

    Yeah it would be cleaner to use a new local.cfg file though i don't know if a mod can affect it. One disadvantage is that if user had already some changes in his local.cfg file it would not work with the mod.
    Maybe a way to do Isometric View with mod and user.cfg is to have 2 mods that write in user.cfg, one that puts isometric view settings and one that reverts to default.

    • Like 1

  6. 20 tips to improve your skills by Borg-

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    Changing the topic how feasible it would be to add the mod keys to the game.

    I am not sure i understood the question but for example nani made a mod for buildings hotkeys. Not any kind of hotkeys can be added then played in multiplayer with others though.

    28 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    About the technologies especially blacksmithing and other not so economical which you suggest in a general way.

    Independently of the map, because in AoE I can tell you clearly where to go, but here is always a thin line of ignorance.

    I can tell how i use the technologies if requested, otherwise i'll let that to borg

  10. Could we make catapults less frustrating to use?

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, elexis said:

    Standground?

     

    1 hour ago, elexis said:

    For aggressive stance, and for forced attacks in any stance it sounds reasonable to follow the attacked target. I suppose it's important to satisfy the definition of an order. If there is an order to perform X, then by definition X is ordered to be performed, and that means doing the preconditions like packing to achieve that. So one could introduce an order type (such as ground based attacks) where the siege engine attakcs units in the target area without implying that a specific unit should be attacked (thus not providing reason to have it unpack at any time). Dunno.

    I meant when an attack order is given, I wasn't precise. Even if in a general case it makes sense to follow a target with attack order, it is often not the case for catapults who target a unit which goes then out of range (since we just want to target the army actually). And the case might happen if we click on a unit that is out of range but with other valid targets around, would we really want the catapult to take a lot of time to pack/unpack in middle of the fight ? But of course, then comes the situation where we target a unit (building) that is out of range and we want the catapult to do all the actions to do so. Since it's difficult to differentiate the case, a solution needs to be taken. In AoE2, packing the trebuchets is always manual, which can be frustrating especially for players slow/not experienced but otherwise the system works well, it's just a matter of choice i suppose.

    1 hour ago, elexis said:

    But that's the weakpoint of siege engines, they should be and remain that vulnerable during that stage, no?

    Well, the weakness would be far from removed (actually, if only this is their weakness then we could say that current cata don't have weakness since we can cancel instantly if we ever want to). The catapults will still have to pack if you see that your army protecting them is losing and you have to go back. This situation is in the case where catapult starts unpacking because you decided so/made mistake.

  11. Could we make catapults less frustrating to use?

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    25 minutes ago, Boudica said:

    I'm not sure what your reasons are to keep the cancel command in place. What do you think about the logical problem of unpacking an almost packed catapult instantly by just cancelling? How to handle the case when there are multiple catapults with different states in the selection? I don't know if I should use the unpack icon or the cancel packing icon. I see several problems with the cancel icon and I don't really see an advantage of it.

    For me it just feels nicer to use gameplay-wise. Without the cancel i would have to stay frustrated with needing to wait for the catapult to unpack to pack it again. It is also how it's done in AoE2.
    Currently, the case where multiple catapults in different states are in selection is handled by having 2 different cancel buttons, although they look the same.
    It's also not realistic having to let the catapult finish unpack where it is at only 1% on the progress, but to be fair I don't want to have a game 100% realistic in situations like this anyway.

    • Like 1

  12. Could we make catapults less frustrating to use?

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Feldfeld

    Personally, i would prefer still having the cancel button. There was this patch : https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1520, I wonder how it went but it should be useful.
    Additionally, I also think catapults shouldn't unpack automatically, they should only do so when we click the button or give an attack order in my opinion.

    I'm pretty sure catapults were easier to use in a21, I'm not sure if it's me or if something changed by the time.

    Edit : Also, when a catapult targets a unit that goes out of range, it will pack and try to follow it, which can be annoying when we intend to use catapult against army, we would just want it to switch target.

    • Like 1

  18. [Gameplay Guideline]Resource System & Map control Elements

    in Applications and Contributions

    Posted

    24 minutes ago, (-_-) said:

    Among equally skilled players, citizen soldier rushes will *always* favor the defender.

    If Player 1 and Player 2 are matched in skill level:

    Then it can be assumed their population composition would be almost identical. People eventually figure out the best build.

    Not necessarily. There are different level of commitment whether to make more women or not. It can also depend on the extension to take additional ressources  more exposed around one's base.
    It's a gamble to make women as it could give an eco advantage but also could easily lose the game, or lead to a disadvantage if someone makes more citizen soldiers and decides to attack with them.

    32 minutes ago, (-_-) said:

    You can consider this all to be a technicality which is negligible in reality. But I have never seen a player rush with infantry on a "pro" 1v1 game. There was the fanatic rush in A20 (?). But they were obviously OP.

     

    33 minutes ago, (-_-) said:

    The outcome being that if I were to bet on borg- and borg- from an alternate reality, I would bet on the borg- who did not rush.

    There actually has been quite a decent number of infantry rushes in the current alpha. It could very well fail in case of similar number (although often the attacker can choose a favorable engagement) but the viability of a rush depends of scouting before to check if it's a good idea. A borg- and borg- from alternate reality will deal differently with their maps and civilizations which can lead to imbalances here and there but borg- will never do an infantry attack without scouting before.

  20. [Gameplay Guideline]Resource System & Map control Elements

    in Applications and Contributions

    Posted

    8 hours ago, DarcReaver said:

    Another issue I have with this is that it adds additional, unnecessary micro for players. In 0 AD it's a nightmare to re-order male soldiers back to work after defending an attack.

     

    2 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

    In the current setup it would be awesome to have a back to work button that automatically reassigns selected units to the last economic activity they were working on.

    But that already exists, press Y

    • Like 2

  21. Balancing Gauls is Easy.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    4 minutes ago, (-_-) said:

    There is no concept of "Ages" in 0AD. Which I always found wierd.

    I played multiplayer fairly regular and still spectate a lot of matches. All the armies composed of the primary and secondary infantry. This usually means the two starting soldiers. Therefore, you can absolutely win against a P3 opponent if you can get a strong enough economy. Hard, but not very hard.

    The only relevant factor from phasing up is the HP bonus and a few techs plus the almighty ram of course.

    I still think Rise of Nations have a superior concept. (Not the fact that it literally encompasses all of human history up to this day). Then again, I like Rise of Nations very much. Much more than AoE. (I like guns and nukes too..so theres that as well)

    The few techs are very important though which is why it's better not be late at p3.
    Also i think rams are overrated but that only engages me

    • Like 1

  25. Are there balancing changes planned for A24?

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Feldfeld

    8 minutes ago, StopKillingMe said:

    Umm no, it was developed by a team.

    And does everyone in the team care about the balance ? No, as far as i know, scythetwirler took care of the balance for some years/alpha, the fact that he was in the developping team simply enabled enabled the other devs to trust him and that fact made sure that the game wasn't broken afterwards. So he can commit his thing with trust, it doesn't mean that it was heavily debated by the dev team.
    And the balance before scythetwirler took care of it were probably made by another single person, doesn't mean so much anyway.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...