BreakfastBurrito_007

@real_tabasco_sauce I think other benefits of the +25% train time would be to make the choice of iberian heroes more important and less easy, and also to add economic risk when trying to make ibercav (firecav+spearcav+cs javcav). If a player trains indibil and then suddenly gets hit by a strong attack, they will have a hard time retraining, especially if they have prioritized stables rather than barracks. This means that it would be more viable to try beat the iber player in one blow (sele ele) to prevent the transition to champions. I definitely still think the iberian fire damage should not apply to units.

@LetswaveaBook I always like having more options, to be honest. This sounds great to me. It would be especially interesting if players find ways to make that mercenary useful to that civ or CC location. For example, Athenians could put a cc next to an enemy in p2 and train merc archers to deny metal/stone stop towers from being made while they themselves go p3 to build a forward siege workshop.

@alre, to be fair I have no idea how powerful the phase cost and time 50% reduction would be. My goal was to introduce a bonus that is both economic and highly exploitable, just like the iberian bonus and ptol bonuses are. I am not sure if a pure time reduction would suffice to be equivalent. For Pers I have been thinking some kind of bonus to cavalry food gathering, but idk how OP that might be for rushes. Perhaps the best way to do it would be general units +200% carrying capacity for meat. So a horse could carry 60 food instead of 20 and a regular unit could carry 30 food. It could prove useful in a number of ways. Maybe with this bonus, a person would be able to steal their enemies hunt to prevent a big cavalry rush later in p2.

Perhaps a good way to help players judge whether a player is smurf or not is a "date created" for the account. This could be found under "User Profile Lookup" thing in lobby.

IDK, some kind of historical justification could be found. If britons were found to adopt technology quickly, or their society developed quickly, then that could justify it. I suppose we could give it to athens and call it "democracy" or something. What is important is that each civ has some bonus significant enough to strategize upon.

maybe you mean 1 stone per 2 second right? Just considering that ptol bonus is 1 food/s and stone is more useful for athens. I think the britons should get a 50% reduction in phase up time and cost as a team bonus. This would make for some very fun strategies. Help with mercs in p2, or fast siege in p3. Other civs that desperately need attention for team bonus: carthage, persians. We need to allow ourselves to think of things that seem "OP", considering how used to the iberian team bonus we are.

My favorite way to play regicide is to go nomad but not give enough resources for a cc. Then it’s just a fight to the death.

I think the iberian team bonus is fine. Keep in mind it has already been nerfed once. Also, this alpha skirmishers are more powerful than usual (from melee units dying first). The main issue is that other civs have outrageously bad team bonuses. Many of them are practically non-existant. Some of the ones that could be changed or buffed are: Britons: -25% hero cost and train time. (LOL) My idea for britons would be -50% phase cost and time. Seleucids: -20% cc cost. Perhaps it could be buffed to 40% to actually result in a strategy change. Persians, Carthage (trade bonuses): these could be left alone, but they should be given something else in addition. Athens: -25% ship training time @ValihrAnt has a thread where he has come up with some interesting economic bonuses for individual civ and team.

@LetswaveaBookAlso, keep in mind Father is not JC JC curses a lot more than father and says “Nubia Nubia Nubia” Father uses auto train frequently, JC does not as much. I know it is very confusing but I thought I would put what I think I know.

I like the instructions very much. You did a good job keeping it concise and well organized and detailed. I was once a cosmic nub and it took me at least 2 years before I was moderately good (good enough to be balance-able in TGs). One thing to keep in mind about 0ad though is that a build order can be great to start out, but to get better from there means to be highly adaptable, and this comes with playing quite a few matches. To be adaptable means to be ready to break from your plan or perform well measured economic adjustments to keep up with enemies. I can't think of a more adaptable and flexible player than @ValihrAnt.

Why did you want a rank of 420, just curious? XD + I also should have known it was you from the nickname.

I think this player just wanted to have a rank of 420 because he likes marijuana. But I agree it is probably a smurf account.

Were you iberians? This would explain them teaming up on you in the early game. Among the strategies to stop the OP death ball is to 2v1 rush the iber player who is most likely to get champions. Your point about endless smurf accounts is a good one too. I also get very tired of the extra difficulties this causes at the start of the game, (we have a debate about the authenticity and/or skill of the account).

archers being faster would not make them the slightest bit better in fights. They would only become a frustrating unit to deal with in p1, whenever a player is full ranged units. No matter how great the damage dealt by the highest damaging ranged unit, so long as melee are always killed before ranged units, the one with less damage will always be inferior. The game changed in more ways than just nerfing archers. Archers still deal significant damage to skirmishers, but they are almost never able to attack other ranged units due to ranged units' preference for closer units. If we allow the player to choose what area of the army to attack with ranged units, then the fights will not always be dictated by the loss of melee units.

These 3 issues at least are all caused by the same issue. I wonder what could be done to help archers without simply giving them more damage? or giving pikes less armor, or reducing skirmisher damage? What could be added to make range matter again? It seems I am the only one who has any excitement about attack-ground, at this point I am more interested in why other people think it is not worth implementing. Please share your thoughts. By the way, I would love to test the current attack-ground that exists unimplemented, but I have no idea how. :I

what is wrong with swords or spearmen to beat this? how does this relate to territory? I guess you can see when they are p3, but this does not show how many rams will come and the direction they come from. Dizaka is talking about p1. berries can form on the outside of your territory, so if there is a small bulge there, then you can reliably assume it is a farmstead for women gathering berries. As a joke we should all change our pfp to purple D.

At least there is no miles/hour, just thinking of all the frustration that system has caused for people who deal with units.

Range reduction serves 2 purposes as a way to nerf iber cav, it would mean they need to get closer to cc to destroy it, which gives the defender more opportunity to surprise them. Also, it enables other champions, and other cavalry units to be more effective against them. Also, if cavalry have slower acceleration, then palisade or stone walls would be useful for controlling invading cavalry movement and enabling spearmen to trap them. Also, iber cavalry would be more at-risk from spearmen or spearcav, or any of the logical counter units than other cavalry because they would usually exist closer to the cc, or enemy units. I also like a reduction in accuracy, and it might make sense to balance the nerf between range reduction and accuracy reduction. Ideally, at the end of the changes, iberian cavalry would still be good but vulnerable to other civs cavalry who have heroes and specialty units.

@Dizaka @LetswaveaBook do you think a range reduction makes sense for ibercav? I think it is a bit too easy to take down cc's. If in the next alpha, cavalry have slower acceleration to put some risk back into cavalry, then ibercav would be more impacted by this if their range was reduced. It at least makes sense to have reduced range since a javelin covered in fuel will weigh more and have more drag than one without the fuel. I think combining this with the removal of fire damage affecting units would be a good starting point to re-evaluate how op it is. As for an overall iber nerf, what do you think about removing the indibil -20% train time?

now think how good sele is after u have kush, iber, and rome on ur team. :O cheaper eles, faster, cheaper training of the best CS infantry composition.

A big attack with ptol or seleucids pike/skirm or pike/sling with hero and elephants is something an iber player can not counter at minute 15 if he is going for ibercav. While iberians have the best CS ranged infantry, seleucids also have that alongside the best CS melee infantry, which means that their skirmishers will be invincible for longer than the iberian ones (melee always die first). If there is any setup that can beat iber, then this has got to be it. Civ team bonuses now affect the civ that give it too, so in a 1v1 an iber will have 45/45 costing skirms.

Roman cavalry can definitely beat iberian cavalry, especially if the iber player does not have at least half of their cav army as CS spearcav. Keep in mind that ibers don't have a hero that can boost their cavalry, so if you mix cataphracts or consular bodyguard with a melee cavalry you can beat them. I have even seen Persian CS only cavalry beat 40-50 of them at once by trapping them against another army they were attacking. I am not saying the unit is balanced of course, it certainly takes way more skill to counter iberian cavalry than it does to use them. I think indibil should have the -20% training time removed, because the -15% cost is both unique and also good enough. As for ibercav, the unit, I would like to keep base damage of firecav the same, but just no fire damage to units, this way, the briton chariots are better when they are head to head. Also, reducing their range would help other units counter them, as well as make it harder to keep them alive while killing buildings such as CC, barracks, or fort because spearmen could degarrison. Let's not forget that cavalry in general are a bit too survivable in a25 anyway, and spearmen are really not an effective counter. If infantry are given fast acceleration and cavalry very slow acceleration, then there will be more instances where spearmen can touch cavalry, and this will effect firecav more if they have their range reduced. Adding or reducing damage is not always the best way to balance a unit. Many players who try to win by making this unit do wind up being useless anyway and the firecav come too late to make a difference.

If cavalry are given acceleration values that are slower than CS, cavalry players would need to be more careful, and palisades would be more effective at slowing down cavalry. If this is combined with eliminating the extra fire damage of firecav to units, then it would be a good starting point. I notice few players can do a conventional attack at min 15 and still make firecav on time. I usually do a small attack with about 100 men and a ram or two, and then retrain directly into the firecav and/or CS cavalry depending on the resources stocked. It can be overwhelmed if a player makes a big enough army to steamroll before my champions come out.

From youtube videos I have watched, it seems the maps absolutely fill with buildings by the late-game, making it feel super claustrophobic. It seems players have a hard time finding open battlefields where they can maneuver or scout.

I have used the iber champions in many TG's since the release of a25, they are indeed quite overpowered. I now feel kinda bad when I use them. There are things in the game that can beat ibercav (this chamion and CS cav that can go with it), and that would be persian, roman, gaul and perhaps seleucid champion/CS cavalry mixture. The main thing is that these civs have fantastic cavalry of their own as well as heroes to go with it (iber has no cavalry hero). I will say that while these civs and their cavalry can beat iberian champion cavalry, it takes much more skill to counter the firecav than it does to use them. Usually, once the firecav are greater than 20 in number, then there is nothing you can do. However, there are a bunch of different ways to stop the iber player from making champions. Delivering a fast, sudden and large attack (all available CS) will make it harder for your enemy to keep units working while only fielding a small army. I have thought about how OP fire damage is, both in damage to units, and to buildings. Previously I have said that the best way to nerf them was to reduce their armor. What if firecav only got their fire effect as a short boost and it took 2 minutes to recharge (out of pitch, I guess)?