Jump to content

thankforpie

Community Members
  • Posts

    229
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by thankforpie

  1. it scared a lot of people back then, you wouldnt be able to share memes and if you own a website you would have to tax outgoing links lol imo they just want the money but have no clue how internet works.

    all webmasters would have to remove all outgoing links if it would be true and then internet would become quite useless (google also wouldn't be able to keep outgoing links for free)

     

    some language version of wikipedia was turned off as a protest

    • Like 1
  2. i atk when i have full pop and sieges or sieges and almost full pop (i play on max200), or when i got attacked and won while still having units.

     

    i dont atk without sieges usually but a lot of players like to bully this way in early game

     

    i think you are struggling cuz your enemy has more units

    • Like 1
  3. 23 hours ago, Jofursloft said:

    In high level games players are not used to capture catapults because you firstly risk to lose many men under they attack, and secondly they need a lot of time to be captured, so it's better to destroy them.

    In general catapults are good cause you can deal a great damage to the enemy army, but are difficult to protect, and lose only one causes you a lot of resources wasted. Rams are more dynamic and fast to attack/run away from buildings. They also have a great life (obv not against sword)

    i agree.. you need a lot of units to protect catapult. these units could be protecting archers instead.. if you hit fortress with catas then distance between catas and fortress is very small, enemy can make one or two ram or elephants and send them to your cats, and you need at least half of your army to protect from it before catas get hit (note they die for 3 quick ram/ele hits lol). u can hit rams with catas but if they come too close ur catas will start to pack and that time could be spend hitting enemy army)

    (lets not forget ur units need to stand between catas andfortressall the time if u want to defend them, if fortress is garissoned that will make big part of your army dead and/or very damaged. but if you dont stay between catas and fort they will die before u reach enemy that will pop out of fortress, simply because u need slightly more time to kill ram/ele than they need to reach and kill catas).

     

     

    while rams, u just send 3 to fortress and continue attacking enemy base from other sides, dont need to defend anything (at least not this much)

     

    • Like 1
  4. I had 5 catas and beautifully caught enemy they just stepped into my tanky frontline to get dmg from archers and catas.not sure how much % of all my dps catas caused but i thought it will cause more, enemy was all in one place (about 100 units and more coming) and i ordered catas to shoot exactly there.

     

    they shot but enemy backed and they started hitting walls i think even though there were a lot of other enemies in range (units that didnt die yet or didnt go out of catas range or came in range)?

     

    ill rewatch replay when they finish game but im pretty sure it started attacking walls regardless more enemies in range (it would be very beneficial for me if they started hitting these enemies)

     

    generally what are catapults doing when enemy goes out of range or dies? they focus on buildings or units?

     

    edit

    oh my they performed better than I thought, i faced army of 150+ with 40 units on front +5catas+20 units staying on the back just defending catas (from back) and catas took down more enemy hp than i expected, maybe because i was paranoidaly selecting catas and clicking on enemy units constantly so even if target dies they continue shooting enemy and not useless walls

     

    i died anyway (1v2), overall they performed very good however they indeed started hitting walls at some point (where it would help me and probably most othe rplayers if they hit enemy units instead)

  5. 41 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

    Yeah, exactly...

    To be fair, I've had loads of fun as well, and had more positive experiences than negative. We're just more sensitive to negative occurrences, and the quitters are a little too regular to ignore.

     

     Sure, but it's not always easy to get into those epic team-games (especially if you looked at my rating), and although it's nice to play with people you "know", it's also nice to play with random strangers (why does that sound so wrong?). In the 1V1 games, somebody would usually ask me if i wanted to play, and if I said yes, more than 50% chance they'd intentionally break the connection when loosing. I couldn't host games myself for some reason, so that's why I was at the mercy of those guys. I should try hosting myself again... 

    yes people below 1400 like to not resign. and just pretend they are losing net in one way or another (eg launching torrents or taking net cable out) just play 1v1 with people you trust until theres more automatic ban system for leavers and non-resigners.  (also, what does it hurtif you lose 10 points? skill will help you get it back)

     

    teamgames are waymore fun anyway

    • Like 2
  6. 38 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

    Sooo. I looked at the replay, or rather replays, as I have three of that game (I guess because of different saves, I have five saves though). None of them shows what actually happened, and none of them shows the complete game. (It's not the first time I don't have a replay of my last game.)

    2018-10-05_replays.ZIP

    2018-10-05_saves.zip

    Can anyone riddle me any of this?

     

    i dont have a replay when 0ad client crashes for no reason and they say i end host cuz im losing jajaja

  7. 43 minutes ago, Astrid said:

    I am sorry to hear you had to deal with such a troll especially him being nice at the start. I do not trust a lot of people in life lol Us Norwegians tend keep to ourselves,and are considered shy by tourists and visitours but when you get to know us better,and you earn our trust, we are your best friend.

    I had an even worse experience playing multi-player with my husband,and two friends from where I live. Everything is going great,and these two guys we end up playing with from the USA are sweet as salty licorice,and they get along real good with my husband. So we are having fun,and into the match when all of a sudden one of them gets real mad after I attack his base,and told me I am a girl that has something to prove lol I just ignore them until he keeps it up telling me I sound sexy,and he wants to date me right in front of my husband. So I tell him no,and don't ask again because my husband doesn't appreciate it. So he told me about his experience in Iceland where Scandinavian girls thought they were goddesses,and if you were not on their level you were nothing,and he resented blonde Scandinavian women. So I told him that was Iceland silly, and I am from Norway,and we are not all stuck up.

    So he started telling me I only care about money because my nation owns oil lol I am a dairy farmer :D So far from a capitalist that loves oil. Want some cheese with that wine ? So me and my hubby an friends decided to finish the game. Yes we won lol They were talking,crying and gloating so much they were not paying attention to getting attacked lol}

    There are a lot of jerks on MMOs lol Especially if you are winning a game :P It seems a lot can't just have fun.

    just mute these guys next time gg

    • Like 2
  8. No firewall, all ports are opened, i can host my own game np (never anyone complained about not being able to join) but i most of the time cant join others people games but other people can.

     

    Is there problem with my ISP/modem? (i dont have router, that modem has few ethernet cable slots and thats how i connect other PCs in my house)

  9. On 10/1/2018 at 12:42 AM, Imperator Ferrum Princeps I said:

    While playing the game I have noticed something very big and historically significant that seems to overlooked in 0 A.D: logistics. I have looked at a past thread about a similar idea but many players did not want to have starving units as it would add to much micromanagement.

    I have an idea for a compromise between the hardcore rts fans and the casual players: a simpler logistical system.

     

    My idea of how it would work is that there would be logistical support units , they would give a "well supplied" aura bonus to armies (and possibly give a weak healing aura too) near it but they would loose health slowly. When their health is depleted they would use the spawn entity on death function to leave behind an "empty" logistical unit. They would then have to travel back to a city to "refill" and become a "full" logistical unit. They would be settable on automatic paths similar to a trader in between a soldier a player specifies (who would probably be one in the center of an army) and they would go back and forth between a food drop site class building and the specified soldier, if that soldier dies then possibly repath to the nearest soldier to the one that died.

    even with that gauls still would be OP

  10. I agree, I get elephant, ram or catapult stuck in trees everyday lul. already learned me lesson and moving them far from trees.

     

    i sometimes get a bug when I click to build a building with 10 unit or more (but mb it happens with less unit as well) and these women or citizen-soldiers just move from one edge of construction to another, i dont notice that and I end with 15 units moving around doing nothing. i was wondering if everyone has this issue cause it slows me a lot

  11. Is there a mod or a way to tell how many units your catapults or swordsmen killed?

     

    In game summary I have Siege category (in unit tab) and I see I trained 3 sieges and that I killed 5 sieges and lost 2. But I dont see how many units my sieges (catapults) killed.

     

    Same about other units. Im really curious to see how my units perform so I can tell if they are good investment or not. For example I would know if its worth to put iron in mercenary swordsmen or if horses with spears do anything at all, lol

  12. 1 hour ago, macemen said:

    I wanted to ask this for some time, and this looks like a good place to ask it. Why are the Celtic civilizations considered to be the best? It seems like (after watching some of the videos posted on this forum, I don't play MP myself) that in 90% of the matches one of the parties is either Briton or Gaul, but often both. Sometimes you also see Ptolemies but other Civs are truly rare to be seen.

    So why are the Celts considered superior for competitive play? Is it the spear + slinger + skirmisher combo that is so effective? (The Ptolemies also have this combo, maybe that is why they are also considered good).  Are slingers really the key to victory? According to my limited historic knowledge, slingers are supposed to be cheap auxiliary troops, not a battle deciding factor.

    AFAIK the Successors have a much more diverse army, both the Seleucids and the Ptolemies have almost every unit kind available. But I have not seen even a single match with Seleucids played.

    i played 90% of MP games as seleucids  they are not underpowered, just slower eco than celtic civs

    + no sword cav (best siege killer)

    + no rams (annoying because anyone can select sword cav and rightclick on your catapult and they will die in few hit, rams have much bigger defense, and its hard to kill 30 sword cav BEFORE they kill all your catapults even if you have 50 units around catapults),

    + no slingers which seem to have advantage over archers and javelins

     

    ptolemies are ok but you have to pay iron for horse javelin >.> while 99% civs have it iron-free, and iron is most desired resource in game usually

×
×
  • Create New...