BreakfastBurrito_007

It seems the ban timed out or was lifted. Either way, thanks guys!

This is a phone pic of my computer.

Hello guys! It seems I am banned on 0ad forums on my computer but for some reason I can access from my phone. What caused the ban? what should I do about it? Any help would be appreciated, thanks a lot!

Dang, why is random civ so complicated? perhaps it should just be..... fully random?

It loses to any cavalry even plain javelin cavalry loses handily to spearmen despite costing 35 metal like skiritai spearcav can kill them very easily. So the main concern is its speed yes, I think @real_tabasco_sauce could tone it down a bit so that its easier to catch and trap them, but overall the unit is much more balanced than a p1 gimmick.

if the axe cav are in p1 what will happen is 2v1 of persians and mauryas where the mauryas rush and the pers boom until 4-5 mins and then kill the cc with 25-35 axe cav. Why should the unit become useless in p2 and p3? does that somehow make it balanced? merc cav are not very good late in p3 once other players have cav and/or fully massed CS armies, but does that make them balanced in p2? No of course. I think @real_tabasco_sauce's unit is more versatile, more balanced, and less sensational than your idea for the unit.

lol for me none han. If the Han civ design was intended to be "trash cs, OP economy, OP champions, OP cs cavalry" then the economic advantages and units need to be changed, because that is not a good design. To be honest, the Han don't need an anti-cavalry ranged unit or a mobile crush unit. They already have great siege in late game and extremely powerful options in general from p1 to p3. The main thing to consider is that their citizen soldier units are bad, they should be as good as normal civs units. Citizen solider crossbows are both redundant (between cavalry and infantry) and bad, so it feels like Han are swamped with this terrible unit that people will avoid making. That is a great tragedy. Can you copy the patch link?

Did a few 2v2s and 3v3s, tried han, merc cav, ptols, cav speed in general cav acceleration is fine in my opinion, might be worse during lag Occasional lag spikes after mouse action, it seemed a variety of actions can trigger this lag spike Han CS infantry seem to be pretty bad (I suggest turning the CS infantry xbow into a "Chu Ko Nu" unit like from Aoe2, with slinger range, bad accuracy, and dps of skirmisher with high repeat rate and longer prepare time). Otherwise there are too many redundant types of crossbow for han, excluding the champion crossbow which at first seems very op. Sword cav in p1 are powerful, but it seems skirm cav might be ok vs them Han farms are too fast. I know there has already been a .6 to .5 change of their rate, but I suggest giving them identical farming rate to basic civs (including 5 woman on farm). I think small area farms are a fantastic buff for food eco security by themsleves. I think the merc changes are probably not enough, but I will wait for more testing to be sure. Maybe HP value increases of ranking up cav can be changed to be same as infantry. Replays: In one replay with 2v3, you can see merc cav from kush, iberian cav rush, and han champ crossbow In another replay with 2v2 you can see ptolemies and Han p1 swordcav rush In another replay with 3v3 you can see old civs but plenty of cav and firecav gameplay. metadata.json commands.txt metadata.json commands.txt metadata.json commands.txt

Yes @wraitii I think the acceleration can also be used by an infantry defender too. I have been testing merc cav and they are of course still very powerful but I am trying to see if they can be countered by restricting their movement, this was just using a few 1v1s in RC lobby. I am trying to organize big TGs on the new release candidate and we will hopefully see a variety of situations on those games.

@wraitii this might make it easier to defend against cavalry using palisades. This would be a great change, because if they have to squeeze through breaks in palisades, then it might create opportunities for defenders to get more hits. One of the things making general cavalry a bit op in a25 (some cav are more op than others) is that it is very hard to counter the movement advantage that they get. :D

Pers will be/ already are a cav civ. Does it make sense to add meat drop off capability to ice houses or would this just be op? I think it might be a way to justify the early cost of ice houses while supporting a cav army that Persians usually require to not die in the first 10 mins.

Cavalry acceleration is fine but I think their minimum speed should be increased a bit. Ok I have not played any MP yet, but just taking a look at han civ and their bonuses: han farming upgrades: +25%---> +20%, or remove town phase farming upgrade han farming base rate .6-->.5 like other civs, perhaps increase farm occupancy to 5 keep in mind the small sized farms/rice paddies are a great bonus by themselves laozi gate should have same minimum distance as iberian monument and perhaps increased cost 2x infantry balance seems ok, a wide array of choices for infantry, cavalry, and champions could be op, as well as new CS and champion crossbow units. This will need to be determined by testing because it is not blatantly op like the han food bonuses. One thing for certain needs to be changed and that is the food/population rate of Han, 1.17 is so much greater than the next contender .95 (gauls) who dont have +10% population space. Han will have 10-15 fewer farmers and 20 more population space against regular civs, this will mean the largest han army will have 30-35 more men than the largest regular civ army. In addition to this, having fewer women makes it easier to withstand raids, and easier to reallocate units onto wood and metal for the production of champions. The civ needs some serious work and we won't be able to balance its units properly if the farming bonus remains this overpowered.

This has actually been determined to be op. There was a test of a mod that gave building AI to ranged units and it was really bad. Even a more balanced version might be super busted against infantry. I would probably say 1/3 fire rate 1/3 accuracy while firing and moving, I admit it’s a cool feature but we want to add good gameplay mechanics and not frustration.

@Player of 0AD my main failing for those army camps is forgetting to train from them lol. Those rank 2 units are overlooked by many players in a25 and they will probably be more useful in a26 with those camp changes. As for balance issues in a26 my main concern are the Han and also merc cav. When I have time this weekend I would love to join a testing session in multiplayer.

catapults have been buffed and so have spear cav. Keep in mind that new features are not the only way to improve a civ, and seemingly unrelated balance changes may open up many more gameplay opportunities for that civ.

I wonder if it is ok to add slinger in p2 or javelin in p2 for some of those civs that suffer most from this. If merc cav are eventually nerfed appropriately, this might save some of those civs from being bad.

BTW there is another way that I like to use with units that have higher dps like champion archers, crossbowmen, or slingers. Alt (option) allows one target for each unit in your selection. For example, if your enemy lacks final pierce upgrade and you have mace champion hero, or if you have will to fight and champion hero, then you can kill ranged units in one hit with one crossbow, Alt(option) click the enemy units and they will go down as fast as you can click (if you have around 15 crossbows). I am not sure which method is best but I suspect that there are times to use shift queues or Alt(option) queues.

It is currently possible to overcome the ranged units' preference for close targets, but it requires concentration, fast clicks, and good micro. This was the main reason behind the attempts in the past months to make an attack-ground or area-attack mechanic for ranged units (or maybe just archers if it seems right to do so balance wise).

I was thinking to just increase their accuracy a bit since that would make them better at sniping other ranged units like they are currently most used for. If archers already have a bunch of accuracy (I thought we nerfed it from a24 and gave back a little in the form of an upgrade), then this wont help as much. When archers get rank 3, I believe they don't get extra damage (correct me if I am wrong). So SaidRdz has been able to win TGs by spamming pike+ archers as kush and leveling up his archers. He targets enemy ranged units and as they rank up, it seems to be more effective. Another solution might be to reduce rank-up xp with archers.

hmm, so the main conclusion is that the famous 6 woman start is maybe not the best? I saw @berhudar's start for ptol and use that now, but I have not done 2 batches of 3 at start with other civs. I have been using autoqueue when my focus is elsewhere or where I would find myself making small batches repetitively. I guess the new general agreement is that 1 by 1 is better unless you are floating res because of it. For example, from berries and hunt you can have high food income, but only one cc to make them from, so I have observed even the people who use autoqueue the most will make batches of sizes 3 to 10 during that period. If you make women to reduce excess food, then batches are better, but if you are making women to fix a wood shortage, then 1 by 1 is better. Am I understanding this correctly?

You could still micro the archers to hit the slingers/javs if you see it coming. If you outnumber the slingers/javelin you could option (dumb Mac key=Alt) click to kill them very quickly. This is a skill that is not very hard to master but requires some focus.

Archer rushed work great if it is a border battle over a wood line. Now you should certainly scout to make sure they are not making cav, but if you stay close to your border the speed difference won’t be a big issue.

Archers can be great units, but it takes some serious skill to unlock their potential compared to skirmishers or slingers. I would like to see archers stay a bit slower than skirms and slings but 1.5 m/s is a bit too big of a gap.

@borg- @real_tabasco_sauce , @Sevda brought up a good point about them easily taking out a cc. I would say 40 would be necessary to easily take out the cc. However, there is more to the situation. My main worry about having axe cav in p1 is that it would make 2v1 in p1 a game-ending scenario. Mauryans doing skirmcav and persians doing axecav against another player who does not have any hunt would be totally unfair. In order for a player to help their teammate against this in p1, they need cavalry, because infantry will be late and cav will raid around them and eventually kill cc. if the unit costed more like in @real_tabasco_sauce's mod, then it would at least require eco to mass up, so it would not be possible to quickly spam them out of cc and end the game in less than 5 minutes, with the help of a jav cav civ in 2v1. @borg-There is absolutely no way axecav could go in p1 and be as cheap as they are now (not even considering increased crush that has been proposed). Having an overpowered gimmick in p1 followed by the unit being useless afterward is frankly not good game design.