BreakfastBurrito_007

I feel that this would mean people would just make the more op hero 3 times and not think about hero choice order. For example. I like to use sele ele hero for fast ele + inf attack. When he dies I try to switch to cav and make cav hero. With this change you would see gaul players go: vercingetorix, vercingetorix, vercingetorix.

@Stan` any civ affected by the mace team bonus can do it too.

@LetswaveaBook from what you said it seems that the longer build time of pyramids makes their construction much less obvious than the 150 stone cost that people see initially. I think between the placement strategies, cost, and time to build, it should be a very interesting mechanic that can have ranges of success or failure.

Well, to be honest I was not exactly testing the unit. I had just come to the realization that mercs cost only 25 more metal and can go to rank 3, I am not sure how much it compares to the speed increase of skiritai. while testing with @real_tabasco_sauce I did notice that the speed made it much easier to wrap and overwhelm other armies.

It seems that skiritai can't rank to rank 3. (latest mod V2)

HAMDOG

@LetswaveaBookI think it should take some planning and resource prioritization to make best use of pyramids, so restricting the radius sounds good.

I like almost all these changes. In particular I think buffing the melee inf attack is good, because it will help mitigate the same balance problem attack ground would address. I am sad to see the iber bonus get nerfed again, but I think it is for the best until other civs get good team bonuses. Champ horses upgrades are agreeable too. Skiri sound really fun now :D. I can test this mod this weekend.

Some people may be against homing projectiles due to the visual, or historical accuracy, but to me the number one thing is dumbing down the gameplay. If you remove accuracy stats from ranged units they become functionally equivalent to melee units. I talked to SaidRdz and he said this is a main reason why he gave up playing aoe4. you keep accuracy for ranged units for the same reason you try to implement attack ground for them, charging for melee units, movement characteristics for horsemen (acceleration can be a start). The reason is to make the units have actionable mechanisms that influence their use.

I think it is too cheap as well, 500 wood 300 stone (civic center) sounds a bit better in my opinion. Keep in mind the build time is a lot longer than 2 houses, 1 barracks, and a storehouse. I do like the removal of the metal cost though.

yea I tried it out and it certainly did not seem OP or abusable.

I like some of the balance changes, and I am worried about others. I am not sure if you wanted free livestock available at all corrals or just the gaia ones, but free livestock seems like a nice way to allow for both fields and corral food income through the whole timespan of a match. @Player of 0AD is, from my observation, the best player at managing corral economy as it exists in A25, so I would be interested to hear his thoughts about that part of the mod. I think this mod is complex enough that we ought to just get together and test its gameplay before more discussion.

This is very exciting @ValihrAnt, I will try it soon.

Large farmsteads can also connect apple trees that are farther apart. Therefore civs with large farmsteads can often connect patches of food resources more efficiently than other civs. There are also trade offs for each house type 5, 10, or 20. Easy to place, afforded earlier, less hassle, using non-wood resource.

I tried out the bundle just now and I must say the unit movement looks great. I was impressed that the units slow down more when they make a bigger turn. As for the overall acceleration values with regard to balance, I think infantry should have faster acceleration.

Well, from the test match we played (3v3) I can definitely say that attack-group results in a much higher damage output (ignoring things like units moving while shooting, chickens not dying etc.). At this point I think a true attack ground would be better for gameplay and would require less rebalancing of units. attack-ground scoring a smaller percentage of hits would be ok, since there is still the power of choosing where those hits go. I think there would be an actual tradeoff, which would allow for situations where u want to use attack-ground and some where you don't.

kill/death ratio means ratio of enemy units killed/ your units lost. It is an indicator of how well your battles are going. Usually you want to kill your enemy more than he kills you so a KD greater than 1 is good and a KD less than 1 is bad. It certainly is possible to win games with KD < 1, but it is not common.

@LetswaveaBook do you think it makes sense to have the other ranged units have this behavior? Also, do you like it the way it is, or do you think the area where units look for targets should be controlled by the player? Ideally we would play some multiplayer games to see whether this is OP in some situations, rather than reaching the fast and maybe not accurate conclusions that we got from simulated battle tests. Also, I am interested in healers becoming useful again.

@real_tabasco_sauce That really is a concerning amount of damage. Perhaps attack-ground (from video) would be worth it even with many archers missing and hitting the ground, because there would still be the trade-off of doing less hits but on preferred targets (like skirms). @LetswaveaBook had some concerns about making pikes useless. I am not sure, but it seemed that you could still use pikes as meat shields with @LetswaveaBook mod, but it is less effective and less easy as in a25. Pikes as a meatshield would be more effective if the pikes were a larger percentage of the army. Perhaps also allowing skirms and slingers to use this would allow them to spread their dmg more efficiently.

I wonder if there is a way to make the archers get a greater accuracy penalty when shooting over other units? Maybe we could just give them an accuracy penalty when using these features. Also, what are peoples thoughts on giving other ranged units these features? Do you think slingers or skirms would be able to see as much benefit from them?

Minecraft has a few things going for it. When there is time for it, for example the holidays, I like to start basic survival worlds with my bro, and I find it much more relaxing than other games.

Ok my main question I have with attack-group as some have described it is: do the selected units remain the exclusive targets of that group until all are dead? In my opinion, this would render the pikemen useless (unless their stats are changed of course). This leads me to support @chrstgtr's explanation of the function the most, since it is counterable, and also does not remove the meatshield functionality of melee units. I agree, the units could just cancel the area-attack and then just revert to normal behavior once there is no one in their area to attack.

@LetswaveaBook personally I liked @chrstgtr's description of it best: working like a tower but for a square drawn area. My main issue with attack group would be that you could 'select' a group of vulnerable units and your enemy would have no way of ensuring that those specific units are not targeted. For example, the 'tower' idea would mean that someone could move their units out of the area if they were paying attention, I like this because there are some ways to counter play it and ensure that pikes can still be useful. I am worried that attack-group would make it too easy shoot prioritized targets, especially while the target army is moving across the map. Example: you are Rauls with 20 pikes and 30 slingers, when suddenly a group of skirms attack-group selects your slingers and so they all die while your pikes sustain no damage. (obviously no attack-group exists like this, but this is just my worry of what it could be like). I would advocate for starting with what we have, which is the "attack-ground" that exists as a diff.

+

@LetswaveaBook I totally agree. While it’s obvious that the merc cav are op, I would hate to see them become useless next alpha.