chrstgtr

Ah. that's new

We haven't figured out the source and who it is impacting. I thought you had it figured out. But I guess we still need to do our diligence to find source too Base settings and base game is def causing a problem for every 4v4 game that I have seen, including games where we ask players to turn down graphic settings. I

Ok. Then whatever the problem is. I'm not sure we know what that problem is right now. Can we set that off? But there is certainly way more lag in a27 than previous alphas.

I know it is too late now, but can we turn this off as default for future alphas/downloads? Every new alpha it seems like there are massive complaints about lag that result from improved art/processes/etc. I haven't played too much this alpha yet. But I am already hearing a massive number of complaints about lag. I tend to agree with those complaints.

I can basically never play during daytime hours. Have fun! And hope it works!

Just change it for vs champ cav. The problem with champ spear cav has always been that they're too good of meatshield against units that should be able to counter them. If the rest of the game is balanced (big if) then a hot fix will be to make CS inf spear counter champ spear cav with a better multiplier. I think this is an overstatement. There is widespread agreement that champ spear cav is OP. Much less agreement on whether champ sword cav is OP. I also don't think I've heard any (credible) person say that CS sword cav is OP.

Seems like it would be real complicated. You can just put fog of war up around walls because you SHOULD be able to see if you have units on the same side of the wall as the enemy. Also, to @real_tabasco_sauce’s point. The whole game is an abstraction. We don’t provide and take away vision based on what your units actually see. For example, you can see enemy units even if your units have their backs facing the enemy. If you really want to make sense of it, just assume the walls are always manned even if those units don’t do anything more than provide vision. The game has a ton of abstractions.

Eh. One requires a player to figure out mods exist, that a mod for maps specially exists, how to download/install mods, and them for the player to actually do all that, including determining its worth the hassle, etc. The other just requires them to do filters on the map selection screen. From experience, I can tell you players often don’t play maps that aren’t included in the base game even when they’re told the downloadable maps are good (see badsou maps experience before they were in com mod). This is pretty compelling if true. I can’t comment on specific numbers without seeing them but I have a hard time believing the additional maps actually take up much space/additional bandwidth. If I’m wrong and this is a real bursen then I agree with you Stan. Do we actually have any reason to believe these random YouTube videos drive any growth in the player base? I don’t pay much attention to them but it seems like every time I see one it is from a YouTuber with a few dozen subscribers and the 0AD video also gets just a few dozen views. Those type of videos aren’t leading player growth. I imagine most growth comes organically from someone googling “games like AOE” and from word of mouth.

All you have to do is ignore those. If a single person likes a single map that gets deleted then it is a net loss. But more to my point, we were promised a lot when a24 gutted the features everyone loved. We were told that they would come back and that this gutting was somehow necessary. Two alphas later and most people say the civs are still not differentiated as much as they were in a23. Additionally, virtually everyone hated a24. Anyways, I already said which maps I found utterly useless earlier in the thread. But that's just my opinion

Flashbacks to a24

Also, find time. We miss you during the nightly games

There’s what? One new map in the last 4 years? And that map is nearly identical to mainland. Yet, mainland is played 95% of the time. There’s always been playable maps. People just don’t play them. (Another new naval map will come out with a27 too).

Lets also reverse all changes from the last 5 alphas, so it’s pure like you want it

Mods: @Dunedan @Norse_Harold @Stan` @s0600204 This is ridiculous. He’s spamming a thread to just threaten and insult others that are acting in good faith. Literally no one has been able to have a real discussion on the forum for weeks because of this one user. You want to show that you enforce the rules fairly? Ban the user that is literally threatening physical crimes

Literally the very first post in the one if the threads about rule breaking mentions another player. Another post in the other thread included rule breaking that you warned about several times I’m not here to say someone’s rule breaking is acceptable. But there are obviously noise in the system PM me if you want to discuss—I’m done posting on this subject.

As you said, many players frequently break the rules. But only one player got banned. That banned player was also the subject of many pages of complaints on the forum, which were authored by basically just one person making the complaints (who notably needed frequent reminding of the forum rules in their rants). The rules should be equally enforced without preference or prejudice for/against anyone.

Rules should be enforced equally and not according to whoever complains the loudest or most frequently on the forum.

But do we know how long those players have been playing? We know that there are a lot of downloads. How do we know that these aren’t new players that are continually coming in but not being retained?

This. I’ve said before that when I initially downloaded the game I played for a week or two until I realized how bad AI was. After that it wasn’t fun to play against the computer. Then I stopped playing for a month or two until I randomly decided to reopen the game and do MP (where I realized how green my kills were). If AI is only good enough to beat a brand new player for a week or two that’s a problem and means you can’t retain most single players for more than a brief few weeks. So I imagine the typical experience is 2 days of “this is impossible with how hard AI is,” followed by 2 days of “I’m getting the hang of it—this is fun,” followed by 2 days of “this is fun and I’m beating AI all the time now,” followed by a day of “is there anything new? This isn’t a challenge anymore.” That’s a really fast lifecycle for a game. A smarter AI is needed to build out the SP mode.

Another thing to consider is that the health tech didn't use to be universal (speed tech too? either way, I don't think any extra 1.6 in speed is really making a big difference). It used to only go to the cav civs (persia and sele) got the special health tech. Those civs were slow enough that the late game cav advantages weren't OP because players would be forced in constant fight before they could mass cav. I never liked this change from a23-->a24. It took away civ differentiation. And it was done to make all civs cav viable, which was already the case anyways.

Decreasing speed will look weird in my opinion. An alternative way to get at this is to make cav harder to mass. Make their train time longer and/or increase cost. The fact that players will just stop booming around 160 pop so that they can fill it with cav says that inf doesn’t attack fast enough to punish the player that purposely stops making pop. I’ve been saying this for awhile. I still think the tank problem exists in com mod. Cav of any type should not be able to run into spears without fear. I’m fine with champ cav being able to tank against sword or range as champ cav is supposed to easily kill those units. But spear is supposed to be the counter now, which just isn’t the case

You could want cancel in the case where you are unpacking but want to cancel the unpacking to be able to relocate them and aren't ready to actually move them yet. Seems unnecessary to keep for that weird scenario, though.

I'll admit I was one of the people saying that it should be attack instead of capture. But after the RC (many months ago) I hated attack instead of capture.

It's been happening since pre-2017. There used to be a workaround where you would join via IP. It would also allow you to replace players if someone leaves mid game. But this workaround got closed in a22. https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/3549 #3549 seems really unnecessary and causes more problems than it's worth. But I digress It is also worth noting that while players sometimes get temporarily locked out of games because their rating disappear there are also other instances where games get permanently ruined because a player initially joins a lobby without any rating. Then the game believes they have no rating. But if they drop and try to return their rating appears (as it is supposed to). As a result, the game doesn't recognize them and they are unable to rejoin a game unless this (relatively rare) bug reoccurs.