BreakfastBurrito_007

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).

Melee champion cav may be non-counterable, but that does not make them OP necessarily, just frustrating to play against. Melee champ cav do not have the same damage/cost as ranged and are less survivable. A key factor of firecav/brit chariots being OP in a25 and brit chariots being OP in a26 is their ability to pay for themselves in unit kills with only very few losses. Personally I would welcome armor nerfs for consular bodyguard ( it seems they get more armor and more damage again like cs swordcav), as well as a moderate hp reduction and a damage buff for spearcav champions. As for briton chariots/firecav I think fire rate of firecav should be restored to its a25 value and briton champion chariots should have their damage reduced from 36 to 30 (still 5 more than firecav, even neglecting the firecav accuracy nerf).

Sounds like it has potential. Do we have the coding capabilities to do this, though? I would be ok with this only if it was on a unit by unit basis (to prevent the AOE3 implementation) and I think the mechanic needs to be designed so that subsequent spear hits have less of this effect (so that the cav can eventually get away rather than being permanently stuck).

That would resemble a25 acceleration because the time it would take to reach walk speed would be negligible, so yes it would be noticeable.

So 0.2 meters is how far ahead the 42 ms^-2 unit gets from the 35 ms^-2 unit at steady state? Yea a 35--> 42 increase is not much, we would probably need to go from 35--> 70+ to see a significant gameplay effect.

If I understand correctly archer cav only have a small damage buff over archer infantry, while javelin cavalry get a whole +2 pierce attack. I think skirmisher cavalry should go from 18 --> 16 pierce damage because: people effectively use them as buffed skirm infantry, ignoring all the mobility benefits they have chicken rush is OP and this is javelin cavalry 95% of the time. javelin cav still beat spear cav in many situations (+ pierce armor is needed for spearcav anyway) Players who take civs such as gauls, seleucids, persians, or rome and make strong melee cav and melee cav champions always gradually mix in more and more skirm cav until they are producing almost purely skirm cav, and this is usually more effective overall than the melee/ranged mix or champions mix. In most TG's if the game is not decided after fighting in the 12-18 minute range, everyone usually tries to make javelin cavalry because for almost all civs javelin cavalry is the best available unit that is easy to produce in a standard game.

I thought corrals were fine in a25 and there really was no need to limit cows to p3. With autoqueue, I think the challenge in corrals is getting the right ratio of horses to corrals, if you have a big enough steady state gain in cow numbers then you can actually be losing food, and on the opposite end, it can be very annoying to re-task horses onto corrals. I agree with @Dakara that the best solution probably is to mix farms and corrals so that there is at least some steady component to food income. I think there is definitely gameplay benefit to having corral food eco as a viable, but non-meta, option. On one hand you have more population efficient food eco that can fight if need be, and on the other hand it can be disrupted by sudden large expenditures of food.

Games usually end before metal runs out, also there is trade for games on maps such as Corinthian isthmus.

how about mainland? yes its common to be able to reach 2-3 metal mines with ease on mainland. Throwing away a unit that costs 250 food? that's not how healers are used. Its very important to keep healers alive so they can reach rank 3 and become way more powerful. not ultimately. It depends. Also 6 healers cost way more than 1 ram, I don't understand why you focus on the metal price of things and ignore the other resources that make up costs.

There is a subset of random maps and biome selections that are widely considered to be good for multiplayer. I can't remember them all off the top of my head, but so far mainland, guadalquivir river, lake, arctic summer, continent (on large). There is another map that has circular walls and players start in pockets around the outside, this one should also be played in large. There are also different Unknown map generations which you can adjust to some extent. For a good set of MP maps: no places for units (in particular rams) to become stuck, in general focus on making pathfinding easy (not the same as making the map obstruction-free) enough wood, few "straggler trees/bushes" that prevent building placement variety of resource amounts, distributions, locations purposeful terrain generation- cliffs, mountains, and hills avoidance of focus on water combat (water combat is not in a good state: sadness), small water sources in places with fish to exploit could be fun. @badosu had a great mod with a variety of MP maps, some of which were modifications from standard 0ad maps. I should say that adding even 1 or 2 maps that challenge mainland in terms of depth of strategies, resource fairness, and general playability would be fantastic.

Well said! I definitely prefer the inaccuracy system aoe2 has over aoe4 which basically turns ranged units into melee units with long arms. Highly manageable rng such as accuracy system or monk conversions are good touches to the game, especially as compared to resource RNG that you are helpless to mitigate.

WOW, I had no idea that if you select 4 blacksmiths and click all techs it will spread them out if you do it slowly. I just make my blacksmiths in a line so I can click each of them like a robot. (tbh maybe blacksmiths shouldn't be so cheap, but its for another discussion).

Dang, I guess I haven't played with them in a while. I don't know why I remembered them as fast.

They deal a lot of damage and are fast. They are quite fun to use but are not always a fantastic meatshield. Well I believe the answer to the discussion title has turned out to be "Yes" and "yes"

The difference between the two is that one is a choice between two options (bow or spear) and the other is a task that must be done in every situation (change from tool to weapon). The latter makes sense to be automated because the player exerts no choice in the switch from tool to weapons and it is just a waste of clicks and player attention.

the manual change from spearmen to archers and back allows the player to make decisions about his units. If the weapon switching is something automated, then I think it loses some gameplay value unless you are doing something more creative than that.

Sometimes it depends on balance. If your team is balanced with 3 noobs and then some 1800, you can't really afford to have the 1800 slowed down by rushing. The main issue with cavalry rushing is before 3 minutes, where it is easy to mass a devastating amount of cavalry and enemies will be slowed down if they prepare or not, since you can just move on to the next player if your first enemy is prepared. The chicken rush is OP for sure, but I am not sure how we should nerf it in particular.

That's a good point. While I think we can test some gameplay things the mod still needs to be fun to play, which is the primary reason for it being as popular as it is, and that is what gives us good feedback and good voting.