ffm2

It's fixed for noobs. You can just hold H and then the cav just makes some jerking movements and stays. But don't tell anyone. In this clip I was able to prevent a group from attacking by placing a foundation under them. This should be fixed imo. foundation_attack.mp4 There is also the possibility via a mod to place a lot of foundations near a fight. Each foundation could tank a arrow and cost nothing if not build. Would be very obvious to see though.

I think a lot goes against the current gameplay. The diaspora from the market gets shortcut. It is possible with a workaround: The enemy can capture buildings in one players territory. The ally could capture it back and have a small territory to start from. This is a very useful, rare and fun mechanic. I like it in this form as it is. This way, as a team, one can have more dense towers. This may result in the border player placing their fields at the pocket player and the pocket player placing their military buildings at the border player. The current movement mechanic gets disturbed. The civilians wouldn't need to flee back and the military from the pocket would already be at the front. Making attack timing very different (worse). But what I'd like: If you could just place a building foundation at the ally from your cost, it belongs to your ally and (maybe) is of his civilization. Often times a player gets attacked always from one flank and he wouldn't place a tower there. Then one sends them the resources and he could build it. Same for barracks, forts etc..

Just get it from the last site of:

It's fixed for noobs. You can just hold H and then the cav just makes some jerking movements and stays. But don't tell anyone.

Yeah, or at the end of the game a upload button. To avoid spam of re-host of games with wrong settings and some sanity checks of game duration, full replay, duplicate uploads etc..

Yeah, that was the thing. As I understand it wfg can't just let any bots run on the lobby. Uff was honest about his bot, but it wasn't approved (yet). I can understand that some boundaries have to be set e.g. to avoid adds, spam etc.. But I liked uffs host. I can also understand that it is not so attractive for a developer to have everything approved of the ideas one wants to try out. For me, I would appreciate such a host in combination with a fast automated pairing system like the LocalRatings Team-Balancer Mod. The hoster could build up a better database than I could by only manually spectating and playing games. This way one could also experiment more with parameters of the pairing system.

A absolute score sounds like a nightmare. You have a competitive game going on with armies clashing and suddenly it ends because one team has score X and the other maybe 100 points less. I got a relative score as a announcement in the oddity detector that tells you when it's time to resign. As clear victory condition would be also good. First I had the scores too announced. Some felt it were disclosing information. Although I see no real game play affecting change, I removed the score announcement. Besides it only tells you when it is time to resign. There is rarely a draw but still too many games dragging on unnecessary long because the players refuse or don't understand when it is time to resign.

Thanks, that is better. Although I like the a attack where one could capture a barrack and place a cc foundation in the decaying territory within a full developed city.

IMO nomad games are even earlier broken by too near set CCs. The barracks are just one hack. Too often 2 ccs foundations are set too near without intention. The barrack hack is then often executed with the help of team mates that sponsor the early barrack. A minimum radius between cc foundations would be a cleaner solution. Even without barrack hack too close CCs ruin games early on. Another interesting thing is this capture doesn't respect the ceasefire but captures even during it. Noteworthy other mention: CC denial through units on the foundation. If one is lucky, one can put their cavalry on the enemy foundation during ceasefire and the enemy can't start their foundation because the cavalry won't move.

In general, I have a bad feeling about this feature if applied globally. This depreciates formations even more (not that I'm a fan of it) as all will be as slow as the slowest unit. At first thought I could see this for fanatics or camp cav. Or with a general speed floor of the speed of infantry. So infantry won't be affected at all. But on second thought, if you think about the micro battle with a few cavalry at the start, this depreciates retreating. Since when you retreat, you know the few wounded will fall behind and fall prey of the remaining army. I think this will be the biggest effect. That on all spots loose single soldiers can get taken out easy. I also don't think more incentives for healers should be implemented. The ranking and cost saving is already incentive enough. They are a complementary unit for when the game play allows it. But not a necessity.

thanks for the link. Good site, but a bit weird that one makes such a detailed site and it's only linked in the forum by a third party randomly in the middle of the tournament... At least for non-discord users. For me it is annoying to cycle through multiple sites and see if on any of them is any news. Forums, git-sites, social media sites, email, messengers .. all after work. So I'd rather not add another site. I'm not asking for some special treatment, only want to share my view on it.

Update on the LR_Teambalancer: Removed the game setup page .xml including the buttons to balance the teams and evaluate the current teams. The new popular mod extraplayers overrides it. Commands in the game setup: /balance /evaluate /rate playername 2000 Also to clarify a common confusion: The teams are paired by the conservative rating e.g. 1800 - 400 = 1400 The winning estimation is calculated by the raw rating e.g. 1800 Might be confusing, but my attempt to simplify it wasn't better (e.g. using only conservative). Also if @Mentula doesn't like me to hijack the thread, just say if I should detach or so. IMO it belongs here best. LocalRatings_Teambalancer.zip

Updated for R28. Most notable change: Game decided announcement.

Farming is best until population becomes a limiting factor. Then comes corals, then ice houses.

I think the balance is fine. Spears are strong, but need to close the distance first. Swords are in general worse that spear or jav. Their strength is their fast attack rate to mow down civilians. But they need to run away from anyone with near equal numbers. On Athens: It's a bit skewed anyway atm. since usually champ cavalry and naked fanatics are usually banned from games. Athens have neither and can shine with the other strengths they have. I don't think its so much unfair how they rank up if you compare it to e.g. elephant archers ranking up. SDL2 really has some issues. Most notably the common complete click bug (fix: ctrl+shift + a few left - right clicks). I tried to play with recording the screen with "screenkey" and "key-mon" but the few times I tested I couldn't replicate it. I am convinced some key inputs aren't reliably processed. This results in some players repeating the H hold key - which results in the units first attacking the nearby unit, but on the next H aborting the current attack and starting a new one. But if you only press it once, there's still a bit of doubt if it actually registered. The unequal heros was once discussed here (one version ago though):