Jofursloft
-
Posts
211 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Jofursloft
-
-
2 hours ago, Dizaka said:
British/Gaul?
Gaul one because of its 10% attack bonus
British, Maurian and Athenian one have the same stats. I find them to be only slightly op because they can be easily countered by spearmen of their same rank (I would nerf them with a 10% damage not more).
2 hours ago, Dizaka said:Carthagian Mercs?
Too strong because they are trained to be immediately rank 2.
2 hours ago, Dizaka said:Roman Champions?
Insane op (unless they fight against many rank 2/3 spearmen), just nerf them.
-
Brescia, Italy )
-
4
-
-
8 minutes ago, ValihrAnt said:
There's a huge difference between them
The only difference is that merch are automatically trained rank 2 (and I think it makes sense). If you see stats of merch and not merch sword cavs are the same. An army of "normal" sword cavs is exactly as op as an army of merch sword cavs if they rank up. The problem is not about ranking, the problem is about sword cavs themselves.
-
Absolutely agree, they are insane strong. In the chat he is talking about me: in that match I faced a fort+cc without an army to defend it. I also had 2 eles (1 died soon) which helped me to take down the cc and weaken the fort. Then my ele died and I faced another full garrisoned fort: my sword cav (about 40) + jav cavs (about 40) + some arch + spearmen were able to take it down in about 30 secs.
The fact is that I faced the fort alone, there wasn't an army to protect it. The army was already dead.
Take into account my army was composed by 100+ soldiers. it's possible to take down a fort even with full infantry if you have enough.
This said, my doubt is: if we make units less strong against buildings how is it possible to take down a turtle city with a lor of forts? If I send rams there are swords garrisoned, if I send eles there is an army ready to kill them, if I send catas they are just too slow to be effective in a match where I had to be as fast as possible. I think this would just encourage turtling.
Anyway, I still think sword cavs are too op, so just lower their hp or damage, but don't make units (cavs or infantry) less effective against buildings.
-
What am I doing wrong? I downloaded the zip file from the link and then unfolded it in 0ad->mods
-
1v1 against "Msg" (1635). I was clearly winning when I "lost" connection. Rated game. From lobby I could see he had resigned after I went out, so I gained no points.
Edit: obv my connection was absolutely stable (I tried to join other matches I could), but I could not rejoin the game until he resigned
-
1
-
-
23 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:
My main question is: what part of the game would break if ranged units were able to shoot other units besides the closest enemies?
I think that shooting the closest unit is something related to a kind of survival instinct for the human being. A unit shoots the nearest enemy because it is seen as the biggest threat at the moment. When a unit is not forced to do something in 0ad it will stick to the last order you gave him. When this order is gone, it will take his own "initiative". For example, when a unit definitely cuts a tree it will move to the nearest tree near him: you didn't gave him that order, he deliberately decides to cut the closest tree because it is the one that requires less effort in distance terms. What I'm saying is that if you give a specific order to a unit that unit will go against his own nature and do even things that will bring him to death or suicide. If you don't the unit will try to preserve himself (which ultimately is eliminating the biggest threat). A 0ad unit doesn't reasonate for the long term good in a battle, but for the short term one (his own life instant by instant).
In addition, I will copy and paste some reflections I already did under the thread "Magnetic pikemen".
I think that this feature would lower the original importance of melee units, which is in fact creating a shield for the shots of the enemy ranged units unless they don't actually reach an enemy unit (at that point their main purpose is: kill). Whouldn't letting ranged unit decide what unit shoot by default lead to armies composed by only ranged units?
And as I already suggested, I think that a solution to this "problem" could be a simple shortcut: when you press that shortcut while having selected a group of units (archers as shown in the image below) the game allows you to select a zone (the zone should obviously have a maximum size), which is represented by the red area in the image (in which there are the enemy slingers). Then your archers will target first all the enemy units who are in the area (in this case the slingers). Then when the area is cleaned up they will return to focus of the nearest unit available. Obviously the opponent is able to move his slingers out of the zone in order to protect them, so I think that this shortcut could bring to a new nice micro skill.
-
4
-
-
I was curious to test healers because I think they are mostly a "psychologic" unit rather than a useful one. In my opinion if you have healers they help you to feel more confident when attacking, but their practical utility is low. As shown in the video below 40 slingers + 20 FULL UPGRADED healers lose against 50 slingers. Same rank, 0 fight upgrades for both armies, almost 0 micro (I just pressed "H" a few times in order to prevent light blue slingers from chasing the healers when they were running away).
In my opinion the main problem is that slingers are not targeted by only one unit each (in this case this type of healer would make sense), but they are rather attacked from multiple units, so healers begin to heal them when it's already too late.
I think a solution could be giving healers an aura which could heal slowly every own unit inside it (same principle of Acharya Chanakya maurya hero).
-
I don't like the idea of having the possibility to take control of allied units just because currently many of this "hurdles and special situations" happen because allies are not able to cooperate in synergy. Being in synergy as a team is a skill often too much underrated.
I would personally prefer a feature that allows you to select the exact point where to ungarrison a definite number of soldiers you placed into an allied building. Currently if you can garrison some sword cavs into an allied building in order to defend it from rams when you press U your units will be ungarrisoned randomly and they won't immediately start to attack the ram.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, pixel24 said:
Thanks, I will try it. Didn't my troops do this on their own before?
Or am I mistaken?I play since alpha 21 and even when in aggressive mode it has never happened me that soldiers deliberately stop working without an explicit order. They stop working only if attacked, so I have always used this shortcut
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, pixel24 said:
What am I doing wrong?
Just select your units and press "H". Your units will immediately stop to collect wood and attack the nearby enemy units.
-
7 hours ago, alre said:
Someone should make a map like that
@nani already created a "king of the hill" map back into 2018:
-
15 hours ago, alre said:
I think looting could be a fun thing, if it was more evident, or even explicitly commanded by players (like plundering enemy buildings, or maybe even collecting resources from corpses if you gain control of the battlefield) but they way it is now, it's just a free gift for players who are already winning, and a strong factor towards making it impossible for losing players to come back from a bad position.
I don't agree with this for what concerns 1v1 matches. I watched the replay of some 1v1 I did against very good players recently and I found that the total number of kills each players gets before the end of the match is around 300. Using skirms and spearmen as an example: 300 kills means something like 5 food and 5 wood per soldier killed = 30 units you can train thanks to the ones who you kill. In my opinion it's a totally fair number.
The main problem in my opinion is that when playing some players don't remember that when a unit dies the enemy player loots the resource they're transporting. I've see this mistake so many times. Always remember to pass from storehouses before going into a fight.
12 hours ago, alre said:it's also possible that I'm exaggerating the difficulty of comebacks, but to me it seems that if your army starts to break trough in its way to the enemy city center, there's no way out for that player, even if he/she was ahead in eco and maybe is able to raid your own or is able to play smart some other way.
I agree with this if we are talking about 1v1 matches (and still not medium/low level ones). However, being ahed in eco doesn't justify you from not having trained a proper army. If the enemy player attacks you with a big army and you have no way to fight that army back I think it's your fault and you should lose.
I also remember a 1v1 @chrstgtr (kushites) vs @ValihrAnt (maurya) in which Valihrant failed his archer ele P2 rush but even in terrible pop and eco disadvantage he could win the game thanks to micro and building positioning. The replay would be really interesting (even if I think that game was played on svn)
-
I decided to upload these 2 replays because some people asked me on the lobby and because I think they can be useful for many players. Uploading these replays is NOT a way to say "Hey look, I am better than @ValihrAnt or @Feldfeld: 1) they are players way stronger than me 2) when I will have a replay of a game in which I lose against these two gods and I play decently, I will upload that too surely!. Nevetheless, these games are two exceptions in which we both played really well and that I think can teach many things to many people
-
1
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, Yekaterina said:
Civs with small 5 pop houses are favored.
Ah also I don't absolutely agree with this statement. I personally boom much better with 150 wood cost houses than with 75 ones.
1 hour ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:many people, and myself included would put iber at the top 1-3 civs. But then, I like iber since a23. Iber, in addition to having very useful firecav champs, also have the cheapest and strongest infantry swords champion available in the game, once you train the hero Indibil.
You are right. My ranking is not meant to be objective and is just based on my personal style of playing. I just don't feel ibers to be "my civ".
-
31 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:
@Jofursloft Also I think the palisade fell, but it did a decent job of buying time. If there would be no pallisade, you would have lost 15 women in the situation.
Absolutely. In fact, I lose none because my men arrived quite quicly. The problem is 1) if the stone and metal mines near the cc are consumed they have no enough time to arrive from woodlines and I cannot keep 20 idle soldiers around my cc; 2) Vali decided not to keep pushing that way, but if he did he would have probably killed some or at least slowed my food eco.
-
1 hour ago, Yekaterina said:
OP tier: Spartans, Seleucids, Iberians, Ptolemies
Strong tier: Macedonians, Gauls, Romans, Persians
Mediocre tier: Britons, Mauryans, Carthaginians
Not recommended: Kushites, Athenians
I think that in this alpha civilizations are well balanced so I find difficult to do a ranking. I think every civilization has his pros and cons depending on the map and the situation you are playing. Anyway, this is my personal tier based on civs I would pick in 1v1 matches (talking about team games its impossible to do a ranking in my opinion):
OP TIRE:
- Spartans (good for rush counter, very good in late game thanks to op heroes and op army)
- Romans (very good for rush counter thanks to skirms and spear cavs, very good in late game thanks to heroes, op champs)
- Macedonians (very good for rush counter thanks to skirms and spear cavs, very good in late game thanks to pikes; I don't like the infantry champions because in my opinion they are too slow, but mace still have a very good booming so you can prevent the opponent from doing Champs himself)
- Britons (very good for rush counter thanks to slings, very fast in booming, very good in late game thanks to good heroes, mixed army of slings ans skirms and sword cavalry, op champ chariots)
STRONG TIER
- Gauls (good for rush counter thanks to skirms, very good in late game thanks to sword cavalry and op heroes)
- Seleucids (good counter for rushes thanks to skims, very good in late game thanks to eles, pikes, cavalry and cavalry hero)
- Ptolemies (decent counter for rushes because having camels is not good against jav cavs, very good in latw game thanks to op hero and op army, maybe the best boom because of cheap buildings)
- Athen (very good counter against rushes thanks to slings, good in late games thanks to sword cavs and nice army)
DECENT TIER
- Iberians (decent rush counter thanks to walls but not having spearmen is bad, good in late game thanks to hero, mixed army and champ cavarly)
MEH TIER
- Persians , Mauryans, Carthaginians, Kushites (because of archers they are a meh counter against rushes, meh in late game because of archers if they have no time to go full cavs)
-
7 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:
palisades and walls are just meant to delay attackers fir long enough for reinforcements to come.
Completely agree. The purpose of this post is to find a solution to the fact palizades are not a counter for cav rushes, not necessarily to make palizades impenetrable. So nerfing cavs is a good idea
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Player of 0AD said:
I think that buildings are not too weak, rather too strong, too hard to take down by soldiers. So please don't change them.
This video shows what I said in the original post: a cc taken down by sword cavarly + jav cavarly in 28 seconds (watch the time of the gameplay not the one of the video).
19 minutes ago, vinme said:so 100-250 wood palasides that are instant to build couldnt stop 2100 + 300 + buildtime+ tranitme alone?
Good point! However, what you have to take in account is that if I want to rebuild a palizade I need way more men than 3 or even 10 (because they can be easily killed by 14 sword cavarly men). In the game also Vali had more cavs around, so he could have attacked that hole in the palizades with maybe even jav cavs, and in that case at least 20 men are needed. When you repair, the opponent can easily come back and destroy it again. All this results in 20+ soldiers who are idle because they continue to move around rebuilding holes.
I think a solution could be increasing the cost of palizade while increasing also their resistance against units.
-
8 hours ago, PyrrhicVictoryGuy said:
Well 15:39 min ain't a rush,were are your pikes? Also Vali is a madman, playing athens.
Civilizations were random, and I think that athen is a good civilization to play against macedonians (the speed of the boom is pretty the same).
I am playing macedonians, whose pikes as you know are also slower than usual pikes. In this game Vali decided to go for a P2 cavarly spam, which resolves in a rush that cannot happen before minute 9-10 (because you must have a solid eco and be P2). The strategy of P2 rush consists of a endless rush of your secondary woodlines and fields by 20+ cavs. In the whole game Vali didn't only try this attack, but killed many of men in the woodlines and constantly kept his cavarly men around my city.
Moreover, the game was additionally slowed because of a cav rush around minute 4 and a following slinger + cav rush. So 15:39 is absolutely not unrealistic. Also, as you can see from the video my skirm+pikes arrived before that Vali could kill my women, but that's not the point of this post. If palizades were originally created to slow down the enemy units in order to defend my base, how is it possible for 14 cavs to destroy it in 8 seconds?
In addition, in a lot of 1v1 in this alpha high level players use their cavarly to destroy the enemy eco (secondary woodlines and fields mostly) independently from the minute of gameplay. When you exhaust the stone/metal resources next to cc it's impossible to keep constantly idle pikes + skirms around it, so you have to go for palizades/walls in order to protect it.
7 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:Because of this I would be in favor of giving cavalry a 0.3x counter versus palisades. This would mean that a good way to counter cavalry raiding would be to build palisades to block routes to vulnerable parts of the base and allow your spearmen to catch up to the cavalry and deal damage. This already is the case, but as evident by the video it is very easy for CS swordcav to break through 1 layer, and even easier if it is 15-20 consular bodyguards.
Good idea!
56 minutes ago, Player of 0AD said:Palisades are something very ugly anyway: Cause lag, attract pointless attacks on them, favor ugly turtle matches.
Against turtling I think that a good idea should be increasing the cost of palizade while increasing also their resistance against units.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Gurken Khan said:
@JofursloftThe attached vid only shows 17 secs of white?
I don't know if you can see it. What I see from my computer is this:
-
I think that palizades are not being enough effective against cavarly rushes. I noticed this in a 1v1 game I played against @ValihrAnt lately. As you can see from the replay, Vali is able to destroy my palizade and enter it in about 8 seconds using 14 sword cavarly men. How is this realistically possible in real life? I find that a heavy trunk for a palizade is something that should definitely not being easily cut by a one handed sword.
This applies not only to palizades, but also walls and buildings like civic centres. In some of the team games I have played recently, I have seen civic centres destroyed easily (30 seconds or less) by an army of consular bodyguards or britons swordmen + champ chariots (units that should not deliver such a huge crush damage).
I am not suggesting that walls and palizades should become undestroyable by units, but at least make them a bit more resistant against these units. Otherwise, there are no truly effective ways to counter a P2 athen or carthaginian rush. Thanks to palizades I countered P2 rushes against pro players but just because 1) (against @vinme) he hadn't been confident enough to attack my palizades walls and preferred to go for a P3 boom 2) (against Vali) soon after what you see in the replay I attacked him with a full upgraded P3 army so he had to use his cavarly to protect his base.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Player of 0AD said:
Athens (warships have -25% build time)
It's the weakest also because there are only a few players who play naval maps, so it's totally unuseful in regular teams games or 1v1. I think we should think about a totally different team bonus.
1 hour ago, Player of 0AD said:Britons (healers -20% costs)
Having it increased to a -40% I think could be a nice game changer. This because I personally use healers a lot in team games and I see many pro players do it as well.
1 hour ago, Player of 0AD said:Carthage (international trade bonus increased
Aside from the fact that trade is practically not even necessary in this alpha +10% is ridicolous. I think it should be like 30%. Same for persians.
1 hour ago, Player of 0AD said:Seleucids (Civic centers are 20% cheaper)
I agree that it's quite weak but not if you consider nomad games, in which is really good. I think this too should be increased to a 30% at least in order to make a real difference.
In addition, I personally think that all the bonuses you ranked as "Strong" should be considered OP, and all the bonuses you ranked as OP should be considered "Strong" XD.
-
1 hour ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:
Sorry, let me elaborate with an example: archer attacks woman under the attack-click of a player, archer kills woman. The closest unit to that woman is a spearcav unit, so it is the next target.
Which is what currently happens in the game, but I think I understand what you mean.
I think the solution could be a simple shortcut.
When you press that shortcut while having selected a group of units (archers as shown in the image below) the game allows you to select a zone (the zone should obviously have a maximum size), which is represented by the red area in the image (in which there are the enemy slingers). Then your archers will target first all the enemy units who are in the area (in this case the slingers). Then when the area is cleaned up they will return to focus of the nearest unit available.
Obviously the opponent is able to move his slingers out of the zone in order to protect them, so I think that this shortcut could bring to a new nice micro skill.
Sword cav OP?
in Balancing Discussions
Posted
You are right, I didn't think about that. Yet, I think that is a problem that mainly affects team games. For what concerns 1v1 games it's really rare to see a P3 sword cav attack. Usually if you have many cavs you won't need to go P3 because the enemy will surrender before (as in a recent 1v1 against @Lorenz11 where I surrended before he went P3). If the enemy survives, it's probable that he will make enough spearmen to rend that +20% bonus practically unuseful.