BreakfastBurrito_007

This would be awesome, I'd love to join even if I just have time to spec. @Player of 0AD I'd say that may not be the case in a27, there has been work to make many more maps playable, and specific gameplay focus on some new maps. Additionally placement options could allow variations on how even mainland plays.

It’s definitely worth keeping in mind that not all of these are similarly OP. A24 and A25 were far and above more OP than the others.

Diversifying and improving the gameplay experience is important, and people are working hard on that. Most players at the moment would consider cav champions in particular spear cav champions to be too strong. Especially troubling is the scenario where allies are sacrificed in order to make them. it is a bit confusing to me what you mean by “heavy”. The Gaul fanatics are champions, but they are anything but heavy. Its also worth mentioning that different maps have different resource availability. Having a purely champion army which you seem to idealize is not impossible, nor is it a weak army. It’s just not always a very efficient way to use resources.

Please don't. This kind of automation (autosnipe) doesn't belong in 0ad. Also what's the deal with Ptols being considered a cheat? I know I haven't played in a month but this wasn't the case then. Same with roman and macedonian spearcav rush. I know that ptols are OP in the base game and that the spearcav rush is strong in the comm mod, but no one considers these things cheating. To make a bulleted list with ptols and progui both included as "hotly debated" is misleading.

@ffm2 What advantage do you think this modified attack move provides? Just out of curiosity. It seems to me that whenever a modification is made to "reduce required apm" it always just gets used as a cheat.

That would be a lot of units though right?

I’m in favor of Philip’s suggestion maybe with 200->100 metal, instead of removing building requirements. I think players intending to attack in p2 will have a better idea of what to prioritize so the “stay in p1” encouragement might not be so bad. In addition it might make it harder for the player who stays in p1 to catch up with techs. There is also the option to go from 3 to 2 prereq buildings. This gives more flexibility especially in the event that these buildings get more expensive. Can I extraneously voice my support for unit specific upgrades?

Ah ok that’s way less impressive.

The funny thing is when I was 130 earlier like you saw I was sniping and my units were walking around the barracks to get to the individual targets I set. I failed this one bad lol. This was before Sniper got a new PC so the game was horrendously laggy. I can confirm all of these were manual clicks (my mouse costs 4 dollars and comes from grocery store)

I use alt+left click sniping with 100+ units. Can you see if I have an apm spike like this? You may have to look for an older game from base a26; since the comm mod came out sniping with skirmishers is not nearly as good as it was. I’ve definitely lost fights because of trying to snipe after the comm mod came out. The extra pathing and exposure for skirmishers is now more prohibitively expensive.

Another thing worth discussing is the effectiveness of palisades and walls vs cavalry. There are some things that can be done to make walling more playable: walls snapping to buildings, destroying trees upon completion, increase overlap tolerance for better sealing. In addition to this, wall rebalancing can be done to make palisades and walls more effective against cavalry. This would also give infantry a relative improvement. For example melee cav could be given a 0.3x vs palisades.

Decger is built different. The curious thing with persians is that they don't have strong eco bonuses for booming. Cheaper production buildings is great but they still cost stone, and after spending the first 300 you don't save enough to cleanly spend extra stone on another production building or a tech. All persians eco buffs usually after they already reach 200 pop (more prod buildings more savings, also res trickle from ice houses, hero building). The reason I think they are so fast in this data is less so because they are faster at booming (I would say gauls, brits and even rome are faster), but because players are very incentivized to boom with this civ.

I have a replay where things were different.

Using continuous cavalry production through p1, p2, p3 to overwhelm a clean player's multitasking abilities. This does not perform nearly as well without progui because both players are on an even field in terms of multitasking, and you even avoid doing it when progui is turned off. One thing you do better without progui is build houses in time. This is because you are actually aware of your production rate when you dont use progui. Isn't that remarkable.

I don’t think it can be stressed enough how important it is to eliminate the grey area of legality which is where all of the impact on clean players occurs. I think visibility mods could accomplish this depending on how they are executed, provided that players and especially hosts are aware of how progui is affecting them in games. @Atrik When people play against you they actually have a lot of commands to put in. I guess you can’t relate to that. This makes it so that they don’t have time to investigate your cheating. Players do notice the gameplay meta changes that result from your using progui, but they usually don’t understand why they can beat you in some cases but not in situations where your advantage is maximized. Once this happens a couple times, players watch the replay or spec the next match to see what’s up.