BreakfastBurrito_007

Another suggestion for Han: "Will to fight" is separated for Han, with a ranged version of the upgrade and a melee version, each with about half of the regular resource costs. Because the vast majority of general damage in the game is done by ranged units, the ranged version of will to fight is better than the melee one, and consequently better than the general "will to fight" that all other civs have. Those upgrades need to be either adjusted or merged into the standard "will to fight"

I think a good start would be eliminating the champion unlock tech for champions that come out of dedicated buildings like gymnasiums. I also agree with @chrstgtr and @real_tabasco_sauce in general about melee vs cavalry champions.

Keep in mind if we ever have some kind of moving buildings for nomadic civs, then we don't have to do it as badly as AoE4 did. I don't know if you ever saw clips of Mongol-douche, but it was extremely cheesy. Suebians sound cool, and I think including Mayans at some point should be an obvious yes.

@chrstgtr in regards to the difficulty getting rank 3 units for centurions. A few ways to do it come to mind: winning a sniping battle since your melee will survive longer, garrisoning in barracks (you only need 8), or training rank 2 from army camp. I agree there is a range between there being some planning and skill involved to get centurions and them being too hard to bother getting. I am not sure where the current system falls on that range to be honest. real tabasco actually managed to get them a few time and he seemed to find some success. I have not been playing as much since my main computer can't work with the new TLS encryption problem, but I would certainly also give them a shot as well. Han are a great civ when their crossbows can snipe, because if they take out your ranged units they can win a fight. I think a great use case for these centurions would be to focus on CS swordsmen in army mass and upgrade choices, and as they try to snipe your ranged units your swords would live long enough to reach rank 3, upgrade to centurions and then sway the fight from there. Rome also has a +1 armor hero that can help melee infantry live long enough to reach rank 3. @real_tabasco_sauce I would recommend adding an xp trickle to units garrisoned in the roman army camp, equal to barracks rate.

This issue is not totally game-breaking, but I must admit I have been tripped up once or twice because of it. It seems almost everyone is able to replicate it too, which is interesting.

Survivability also affects the damage output because they need to take damage while walking to a target. You need at least some disparity in % attack buff and %survivability nerf in order to even out the overall capability of the unit.

I was thinking more like 15% 30% the same way you ordered it. I would not mind a net buff for melee units to be honest.

As far as I am aware, the last remaining dancing form is hero based, and even it can be avoided at times by using alt/option to individually task your ranged units.

Case closed. I am pretty sure @shft has demonstrated the problem perfectly to the necessary people in these forum posts. I don't see any need for more comments.

I looked at the auto-update history of windows 10 and it seems like none of the listed updates happened near to when the TLS problem started. @Norse_Harold was suggesting it could be a windows update, so perhaps there are some hidden ones not listed? Right now I am doing the "wait" method. Thanks @Stan` for taking a look at this.

lmao I don't think being better than other players is an excuse to insult them. That being said you also launch tirades against players better than you after you intentionally sabotage your own team. It seems you have an unstoppable urge to feel superior to other players and I think this is the problem at its core. My advice would be, to quote Ol' Teddy: "speak softly and carry a big stick". In this case, the big stick is your skill, and speaking softly is your treatment of worse players. Keep in mind there are many players who adhere to this: basically everyone except a few players that the forum is about.

I think it is important to remember that in a team game there is usually only one of these people and 7 others who are there to have a good time. The offenders are out-numbered and if we all demonstrate unity against the verbal abuse then it can help. Issues can arise when the offenders use the natural competition of two teams as a way to ensure they are not singled out as being an offender. An interesting case to think about is when an offending player refuses to unpause the game in order “win” some argument. I have only witnessed it a couple times but I think it’s outlines the difference between people who play 0ad for fun and people who take things too far.

I think there is a difference between politeness and being a good person. Many people are polite, but very mean, and I don't think many people fail to detect the meanness behind polite language in those cases. At the same time, many nice people use rough language, it is just more common in different vernaculars. Overall I don't think censoring particular words prevents mean people from being mean. In the case of JC and Shyft, they are both bad people (racist, nazis, ect) and use rough language as part of their efforts to feel supreme. Banning their use of insults will just make them use other words to pump out hate to other players.

I predict that the next time #3 goes up for a vote it will be shot down again, with the same vague reasons given as this time. I just want this written here so that I can quote it when it happens.

Yep let us hope that the mod contributors are still willing to progress the game despite having their best work outvoted by people privileged to have both no work invested in patches and near total ignorance of the patch itself. Its a shame that people are denying this effort a chance to even be tested. A26 was a fine alpha even before the community mod, aside from the han fields bug. People must understand that there was a risk of the Athens team bonus being OP for example, but we voted for it because we wanted to try it out.

I would like more people to have this mindset. People are saying that all the upgrades in the system being bundled together is a bad idea. I suppose the alternative is to have 23 fractions of the system all in series in the poll. If you support this way of voting for the system please state the advantages.

That blame should go to the boring players who resist anything they don't understand. Keep in mind that to understand it all you need is to read the link that is posted and ask the author a question. That would be very twisted indeed if you got blamed. If I remember correctly the Team bonuses were almost rejected last time and have since been quite successful in terms of player feedback.

I think the main reason you can build a cc there and not a storehouse is that cc's can be built without territory root, but storehouses can not. The pocket of territory you capture with a barracks is not "enemy" territory anymore, so cc's can be placed there, but is "un-rooted" so you can't put a storehouse.

By far the most iffy changes are the blanket cav hp/speed decreases. There is certainly no one size fits all cavalry nerf, we can't even agree on one change to one unit: for example spearcav +1/2 pierce armor or javelin cavalry -2 pierce attack. Unit specific upgrades are exciting though, and offer their own balancing opportunities.

@chrstgtr I think a good way to do it would be mixing in some healers, and training swordsmen already rank 2 from the roman army camp. I think it is great because it encourages using the CS swordsmen as damage dealing units rather than meatshield.

to be honest decreasing the cost and build time also would give seles an advantage when it comes to diminishing farmer returns because it would be easier for them to build extra farms to spread out workers to 3/5 per farm or so. Perhaps the diminishing returns is something more players should consider even with the current game, at least I have never intentionally spread out my farmers.

About the "either or" discussion for seleucid civ bonus, I think the farm cost and build time reduction will have more gameplay impact than the elimination of diminishing returns per farmer for seles. The diminishing returns per farmer I think would get treated as a simple food rate bonus and would not as visible or actionable in-game.

Hmm I have heard of this happening to players such as berhudar. I am using Windows 10 home, and the weird thing is that this issue suddenly started. Since it has been constant since the onset of the problem, the frequency of me not using TLS to keep playing MP would be 100%. Obviously I shouldn't do that since I don't want my pw stolen. Do you think its worth trying to re-install 0ad and the mods?

I have this same problem, it started 4-5 days ago. I tried disabling the TLS encryption and I got into the lobby just fine. Is it ok or safe to run without TLS encryption in the MP lobby? or is there a better way to solve this issue?

The main reason no one uses it is that its hard to get the troops in the right places, and also you can only garrison 8 troops up there, which means its not worth the clicks to get them up there unless you are iberians in p1. I have previously recommended adjusting the number of positions to 20 so that it can be useful, even if there is some unit overlap (god forbid).