Feldfeld
-
Posts
480 -
Joined
-
Days Won
11
Posts posted by Feldfeld
-
-
-
1
-
-
And the last game got played. The deadline extension proved to be useful! Remember you can ask one if you couldn't play your game in time due to unfortunate things. Thanks @alre for staying available while he could take the free win.
__________________________________________________
Round 4 matches:
@Feldfeld vs @Edwarf
@ValihrAnt vs @MarcusAureliu#s
@Philip the Swaggerless vs @Dakara
@Player of 0AD vs @LetswaveaBook
@BeTe vs @seeh
@rm -rf vs @alre
Bye (no game for this round, +1 point): @chocapocaThe deadline for this round is Friday 9, 23:59 UTC.
Please try to organize your match as soon as possible using forum private messaging! Beware of timezone differences.
Please message me personally if your opponent doesn't answer you after 2-3 days.
__________________________________________________
Replays of past round:
Round 3 (Community Mod 0.26.3):
FTS2-Round3.zip-
1
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, seeh said:
(https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/95448-0-ad-friendly-tournament-series/?do=findComment&comment=532457)
I'm not sure if I understood that correctly.now it's clear to me there is simply no opponent for the round for me. thank you for the information
Yes, sorry, that's a consequence of having borg- forfeit the tournament.
If nothing changes next 2 rounds will have a different player getting a Bye as well
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, BeTe said:
But I don't understand first 2 points, what BO would be appropriate and how to come with more cav? I tried without stable to make cav from CC, but then I am behind in women and food production issues later...
Basically look at my game against LetswaveaBook in the tournament. If I didn't get attacked, I would have gone once I had 8 cavs total (so after a batch of 3 cav are trained)
16 minutes ago, BeTe said:I tried to disrupt food, but then cav got injured and I had to heal them.
That's because
- Your opponent had a few units inside CC so this shoots more arrows
- You stayed too long under despite that
- You had a low number of cav so CC arrows don't get split and that makes you have to go back sooner as cav gets in low health sooner.
Of course unit management is tricky there especially if you are against this opponent.After you went back I stopped watching because from there you lost the timing to pretend making damage. Since you didn't disrupt enough on your first go then the economy advantage of your opponent is too strong and he can defend the rest
22 minutes ago, BeTe said:The only cav that I found useful are Persian 60m range cav. Especially in p2 when you can upgrade them to 70m range.
But still , should be easy to defend.
Well tell this to vinme's opponents
he got himself a good elo by only using persian archer cav strategy pretty much. Not saying it's easy of course it takes skills to do that strategy properly.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, BeTe said:
fyi , regarding p1 cav nerf, there's recent tournament game between Weirdjokes and me. I built cavalry and tried to harass but they seemed useless against infantry slingers with few spearmans. I only lost build time, resources and my attention on them. I did @#$% up macro game, but point is I got literary nothing from cavalry. Not sure what I could do with them better.
However, I don't find this match is high level, but maybe you guys can see something interesting for balancing.
Cheers.
You could have done:
- Better build order
- Coming with more cav (a requirement at that timing unless you spotted a weakness by scouting)
- Focus on disrupting food income (idling women near CC while not staying under its fire, raid the additional berry patch until the slingers come then retreat, force slingers to stay on the berries unless you come back, alternate checking food sources)Of course against this defensive position and that player it takes good skills to make it. Not many players can do it. I'm curious of what would have happened if I were in your spot.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, norjay said:
Two observation i made by playing against the computer or watching replays:
- no one uses defensive structures. I would really like to see some replays, where someone builds walls and put it to a good use.
-
a lot of games are decided very early. Often one single successful rush attack can define the whole game.
Once the infrastructure have taken some damage, the defender remains on the back foot.
Especially when i play against the computer, once i gained upper hand, the rest of the game is just mopping up.
I really wanted something to make a game more challenging, even if i am in a superior position.
And i want walls and palisades. For most random maps there simply seems no use for defensive structures.Maybe this map only works against the computer-opponent, because the computer never walls himself in.
Towers and fortresses are used in 1v1s and TGs on mainland.
Walls are not but that's because Mainland is as open as it gets, on top of players sometimes not realizing they are in "must defend" situation. Also, that champions are weak gives less incentive to stall out.
Mainland is not the only map. There are maps that are less open but not as closed as the ones you created, and they give some easy to defend positions, one example are water maps (eg Rivers, Corinthian Isthmus). I know by experience they play like this
At the end of the day, players mostly play TGs on Mainland. It may be due to lack of taste, but the fact that many options are hardly viable for civs doesn't help.
7 minutes ago, hyperion said:Obviously all civs need catas if fortifications should have any decent role in this game, which IMHO they should.
I kind of agree. In AoE2 all civs have trebuchets. In Delenda Est I think infantry can build catapults on the field which is an interesting idea.
-
1
-
Too chokepointy imo. From my experience, chokepoints make it too easy to defend and leads to stalemates. If not for that problem I'd be advertising my Alpine Mountains map for multiplayer.
Some civs only have rams as siege capabilities, pushing with rams can be incredibly difficult against a well defended position. If there were some other siege options, or if walls and towers could be disabled in some maps, this could maybe change this situation.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:
ok, recall the discussion on cavalry nerf. There are three separate and independent nerfs considered: nerf cav damage, nerf cav HP, and increase infantry speed.
As written so far, increasing infantry speed would be +0.5 m/s speed for the basic "unit" class. (skirmishers get a little more than 0.5 faster, pikemen get a little less than 0.5 faster). This is intended to close the mobility gap slightly.
I am pretty confident in my HP branch which is:
- ranged cav: 80 hp for CS, 180 for champ
- melee cav: 160 hp for CS (unchanged), 280 for champ
I have debated the best approach for a damage nerf, and I think the best approach is really to equalize the DPS for cavalry and their infantry counterparts. For ranged units, I would bring skirm cav and archer cav damage down to equal infantry values, and for melee units, I would raise infantry damage to equal their respective cavalry values. This is nice and dandy for everything except for 2 exceptions:
- pikemen (have no cav equivalent), so I already made a separate branch for pikemen which could be added independently: https://gitlab.com/real_tabasco_sauce/0-a-d-community-mod-unit-specific-upgrades/-/compare/main...pikemen?from_project_id=36954588&straight=false
- Spearmen/Spearcav (see below)
spearmen/spearcav:
currently all cav have more damage than infantry except for 1 unit: spearcav:
spearcav: 4h 3p per 1.25 sec = 3.2 hack, 2.4 pierce DPS
spearmen: 3h 2.5p per 1.00 sec = 3.0 hack, 2.5 pierce DPS
What I propose for these units is to use the margin of increase seen for inf swords (6.5/5.5) to increase spearmen DPS
3.0 hack, 2.5 pierce DPS * (6.5/5.5) ~= 3.5 hack, 3 pierce per 1.00 sec for spearmen
keeping the same 1.25 sec repeat time for spearcav, their new hack and pierce values should be:
3.5 hack, 3 pierce per 1.00 sec *1.25 sec ~= 4.4 hack, 3.75 pierce for spear cavalry
Of the three nerfs, which sounds like a welcome change? I could see all three working out fine, but maybe just 1 or 2 of them are agreeable to you all.
For me, either no nerf, or the small damage nerf for skirm cav and archer cav only.
For the reasons I already wrote in this thread, I think cavalry is in a good place currently. It's already very hard to have an effective rush if the defender plays appropriately. Infantry is still plenty useful. Etc
-
3
-
10 minutes ago, Philip the Swaggerless said:
Just a comment about the recent change: I have not detected any change to my gameplay or strategy based on the fact that territory expansion has been reduced. Has anyone?
I use it in 1v1. I imagine it doesn't matter much in TGs though with that mainland
-
1
-
-
Right click the "no formation" to make it default
-
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
I packaged all replays to make it less tedious for late watchers:
Round 1 (Community Mod 0.26.2)
FTS2-Round1.zipRound 2 (Community Mod 0.26.3 - latest)
FTS2-Round2.zip-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, seeh said:
thats Version: 0.2.1 ... ah. there is a button
Previous Releases
update 22-1125_0012-24 i give up to show this. idk whey its not work for me. lets look forward. some other good games will happen.
You have community-mod 0.26.0, this shouldn't be on your system. You'd need 0.26.2 to watch the specific replay, or 0.26.3 from now on (latest version)
Anyway fine if you don't want to spend anymore time, indeed it's just a game
-
There is a version available in my thread. (https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/53880-feldmap-a26/ look a26 archive)
You can also download the file feldmap.zip from there: https://0ad.old.mod.io/feldmapThe replay should work with 0.2.1 as well however.
-
34 minutes ago, seeh said:
Maybe try to only possibly have one Community mod version read by the game (0.26.2). This means temporarily removing 0.26.3 from game files, not just deactivating it. Then try again
When you had 0.26.2 activated only it looked like there was no compatible replays while there should be some played in that version, or maybe it was still the result of a previous filter.
And make sure your 0.26.2 community mod has the exact same mod.json as the original and the replay file has not been modified
-
1 hour ago, Norse_Harold said:
I haven't tested it, but there are a lot of complaints of crashed and disconnected games recently. Would you rather roll up your sleeves and help people with the troubleshooting process or do the easier thing and eliminate all possibility that feldmap is causing the problem? What's the benefit to having IgnoreIncompatibilityChecks, anyway? People should absolutely be using the same version of the mod if Mainland TG is in use. We haven't tested all code paths with differing versions.
Well, what happened already with the troubleshooting process of wave of OOS? I have not been informed if this happens exclusively with Mainland Balanced (that would quite clearly be an issue), or if this happens in Mainland too. For more than a year, players without feldmap have played TGs on Mainland with players using feldmap without any issue because the mod is compatible and doesn't change Mainland generation in any way.
(also do players play TGs on Mainland Balanced now? Last I knew they didn't and preferred Mainland)The benefit of IgnoreIncompatibilityChecks is to allow players having the mod to play games (like TGs) with players that don't have feldmap. Otherwise, players would have to disable it to join a game, or won't be motivated, split, and make their own game. Or players without feldmap (like pure TG players) will be forced to install it to play a normal game, which is more bloat on top of possibly them not knowing what could expect. This can lead to a 4-way split in lobby and more annoyance overall.
Edit: also anyone motivated could install feldmap 0.2.0 and watch the replays of round 2 of my tournament, which have been played in 0.2.1, they will see that they won't have any issue watching them.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Norse_Harold said:
Please consider removing "IgnoreIncompatibilityChecks" in mod.json for feldmap. It has an unintended side effect of not ensuring that players are using the same version of the mod. This can lead to game crashes or OOS errors at seemingly random times if players have different versions, which is very common.
Did this actually happen? I believe it is impossible. The only thing my mod change are the generations of the new maps added by the mod, namely Mainland Balanced and Alpine Mountains. There is nothing changed to any other aspect of the game.
If map generation is different, it will be the case from the very start of the game. The simulation is different, and it will be detected immediately by the game (which I believe has an efficient hash-based mismatch detector).
My update to feldmap removed Nubia from the Mainland Balanced biome, that's all it did. I believe it is impossible it will induce crashes or OOS like you describe.
I already have instructions ready if players face an OOS/crash at the very beginning of the game on the Mainland Balanced map only, which is the only moment it could happen if my logic is correct. I also didn't receive complaints about it.Personally I observed a few OOS at beginning of alpha 26, and I didn't yet update my mod at the time IIRC.
-
Unfortunately, borg- didn't connect for more than a week.
I had multiple players tell me they thought they were / would be eliminated from the tournament if they lost one game. It is not true as we are playing a Swiss system. All 5 rounds are played by every players, and there will be a ranking in the end. I didn't properly explain the system and I am sorry about that. This may be the reason for borg's inactivity, in any case, I hope there won't be more players getting confused by this.
I decided to forfeit borg- from the tournament. I could have tried to replace him but either it would induce even more delay to the tournament or could lead to some big unfairness.
But forfeiting borg is still quite unfair to @MarcusAureliu#s, as it hurts his Bucholz (first tiebreaker) quite a bit while it should have been pretty good after he got a win against a favorite. That may cost him a few spots when we get to final standings. I still salute his win which I think also showed improvement of his level.__________________________________________________
Round 3 matches:
@ValihrAnt vs @Feldfeld
@Dakara vs @Edwarf
@rm -rf vs @chocapoca
@Player of 0AD vs @BeTe
@Philip the Swaggerless vs @alre
@LetswaveaBook vs @MarcusAureliu#s
Bye (no game for this round, +1 point): @seehThe deadline for this round is Wednesday 30, 23:59 UTC.
Please try to organize your match as soon as possible using forum private messaging! Beware of timezone differences.
Please message me personally if your opponent doesn't answer you after 2-3 days.
-
4
-
-
-
1
-
-
I expect needing 1 or 2 substitutions in the tournament. Even if you are not sure you could play every week that could help (nothing lost by trying). Of course if you don't like the idea of playing lower rated opponents it's fine. I would expect your first game to be against a ~1600 and if you win then close to ~1800 next one
Anyone interested in substituting could message me
-
7 hours ago, BeTe said:
Just to collect info here, it seems seeh noticed one more imbalance in his video (around min 7-8).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niQ69mTcYV8I'm not sure I could understand which one.
-
9 minutes ago, BeTe said:
Long-term solution is not "don't play maps x,y,z..." and install 3rd party mod.
I just hope we don't lose new players b/c of that.
Well, arguably it's my responsibility since I'm knowledgeable in that area, not to mention other devs agreed balanced with balanced map changes for when I complete my patch. The problem is, well, development is slow, be it for me or WFG team so the long term is not really a choice here
-
1
-
-
that's the berry patch I'm talking about. That makes 6*200 = 1200 food, + 6 sheep = 1800 food that's explicitly distributed by my algorithm. On the other end, you had 1800 food from animals so the result is equal.
The other 400 food berry trees are what I call straggler berries. They are not taken into account by my food generation. When they are isolated, they are quite irrelevant from my experience, as it often is better to just transition into fields earlier instead of taking them. If they are near another resources, that could lead to some small imbalance.
That is the case here, one tree is close to his hunt, so he can have a good efficient 1 for 2 farmstead. I would argue that makes his map a bit better overall. Not really game deciding but straggler berries could take a change, once I go back to working on that (january or february maybe).
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, BeTe said:
P.S.
he had 2 trees (800 food). I had 16 animals (1600 food). But he had very near tree and 6 sheep. @Feldfeld
I'll check again when I can but from what I remember he had a full berry patch on the bottom right of his base, which on this biome is equivalent to about 2 hunt patches (anyway my algorithm does the calculation so the total amount of food is equal without considering straggler berry trees)
From my experience at playing at high level this alpha, none of my losses could be explained by food imbalance. Wood generation is way more important and even after removing Nubia biome I know it will need a more sophisticated change.
I found that I always have a way to take advantage of my food distribution, and if I didn't unnecessarily mess my macro I always had an equal or better economy than my opponent.As far as I know, apart from straggler berry trees, I never saw evidence of imbalanced food generation.
-
1
-
i have no idea
0 A.D. Friendly Tournament Series
in General Discussion
Posted
@Dakara told me of his win, but he'll post the replay tomorrow. I will now launch the 5th and last round of the tournament!
__________________________________________________
Round 5 matches:
@Feldfeld vs @Dakara
@ValihrAnt vs @Player of 0AD
@Edwarf vs @MarcusAureliu#s
@Philip the Swaggerless vs @BeTe
@rm -rf vs @LetswaveaBook
@chocapoca vs @seeh
Bye (no game for this round, +1 point): @alre
The deadline for this round is Friday 16, 23:59 UTC.
Please try to organize your match as soon as possible using forum private messaging! Beware of timezone differences.
Please message me personally if your opponent doesn't answer you after 2-3 days.