vinme

scrolling through, rn id say 5 civs are actively worse in civ bonuses than pto, and few are equal. id say gaul, rome, sele, carth are same. and brit, han, kush, mace, mayu are worse. unrelated but healers need to get cheaper by 25% at least rn, still too expensive, would make mayu/brit bonuses viable more so.

at min 15 lets say, youll get 900 metal with trickle, with initial trickle having more value, albeit completely unusable for many civs till p2. i have underestimated the trickle, my bad. you are right, pto bonus is one of the best ones in game. and while with siege conventional use of lets say avg of 3-4 siege, becuase often they die/more get added, per 15 min length of game, and even much more long term, is like 600 res gain, mostly wood, wtih 25% cost save of siege+arsenal. now if you focus on utilising this advantage specifically, esp as mace has reasons to, by spamming siege, you can get the value upto several thousand. i think it if it gets boosted, it can get abused by this siege spam. if it stays same, itll get disadvantaged vs other bonuses. better remove it altogether, perhaps, but then theres no siege supremacy vector for mace. so keep it, but as a civ bonus, not as a team bonus, sounds good. and 1 metal trickle is a good substitute, while earlier weaker in utility than pto one, long term should be much stronger, esp as metal becomes scarce in long gmaes.

overall i wanan say that right now, mace is one of the strongest civs avaliable, with some versatility and options. merc cav being a staple core as a tool, with mace cheaper wood, stone and metal in effect as their storehouse tech costs are instantly unlocked(great value). the heros, one of best heros in game with 15% move, 10% dmg(60m), enemey soliders/structures -10% dmg(30m) AND enemy CC Capturepount/regen rate reduction by 50%. much much better than conventional 20% dmg hero. id say as good as if not better than athen 3 armor hero. AND the siege hero, also very good, its effects compounding with mace cheaper siege and often usable/better in context than the previously mentioned one, so this versatility is valuable. the speed hero can be used very well with inf AND cav, esp compoundign with merc cav in many ways like speed, cc target vulnerability, dmg, debuff. I dont see why mace needs any boost necessarily, but its not THAT op that getting some would make it broken. maybe allow hero to come from a mace hero room of sorts, this hero room could also make special siege techs. maybe tech for "efficient siege personele" thats 600 metal 60 sec but reduces siege pop cost by 1/3, so it wouldnt work on bolts, only on rams/siege towers. second option of siege for "armored plating", costing 600 metal 60 sec causing +2 armor but 20% less speed for siege.

p2 arsenal maybe can be good, maybe not but id say dont let it produce any siege at p2, this might be somewhat confusing for new players, but whatever. yes, same mechanism as mayu p2 ele stables, as well as even maces own stables allowed at p1, while if you time it right moment you reach p2 you can start making mercs, instead of carthage/kush need to force up a building at a cost/delay on reward of p2 ing investment. many other such examples like pers p2 archer cav, p1 stable, etc.

sounds cool, perhaps they could get something like a technology that gives X% + movement speed for champion pikemen, but -Y armor. lets say 10% move speed per 1 armor, so lets say -2 armor but +20% move speed. tech costing only 200 metal 50 sec or something, can reverse back infinitely for same cost per change. call it X reform or something, to explain the costs. since in effect, infantry army movement speed is in most practical scenarios dependent on mele infantry movement, with meme infantry being the slowest, and pikemen being the slowest of them. i would doubt, that this tech would be used in most circumstances, as harming brunt power for sake of mobility/versatility is rarely selected. could be used esp in tgs, to cover distance 20% faster, lets say as pocket, to reach ally/enemy, and you could time the reversal to get advantage when you reach via starting tech right on dispatch. is 400 metal worth getting to ally 20% faster? idk.

25% cheaper siege is a very good bonus i think, one of best in game. especially vs turtle, in effect, it makes enemy buildings 25% weaker, you can think of it like that. a metal trickle of 1 per second is an utterly garbage bonus btw, completely useless effectively compared to other bonuses. even pto food one, while giving reasonable eco boost early on, is one of weakest.

i still think its not fair to use mods that give compettetive advantage, when many players dont even know they exist. varying levels of severity ofc. like autociv hotkeys, i dont mind much, i still havnet gotten around to starting to use those, but at least its relatively known mod and i think the advantage is minimal, altho @ValihrAnt would disagree. ProGUI mod is straight up cheating and theres no discourse on this on compettetive level, everyone agrees. still it makes things interesting with weaker players, so as long as im aware they use it, its ok. altho still @#$% move to not reveal ones use thereof. i dont see a solution to it all as 0ad doesnt show mods used by non host participants, and one can always secretly have some op mod. i do like the idea of everyone having option of the perceptive adjustments, like tree change, projectile visibility, projectile sound, the mineral thing. remove the skill of discerning confusing visual details a non issue. a practical soultion could be putting all the "compettetive advantage mods" into a single thread, with explanations so every1 can keep upto date easily, and some jerks wont cheat through these obscure and secret advantages.

can someone unmute me? i dont find this reasonable.

i like current champ system of being a pop save unit, ie 1 champ costs aprox 2x or more than a regular solider, is proportionally stronger per cost, but also gives population advnatage, ie x res invested in champs will give same power but half the pop cost. your idea would ruin this, i think this differentiates them more than the idea of them being just better copies of regular units, that cant work. there are several such units that sacrifice eco option for military advantage commitment, with cav being one in a sense but more literally mercs, champs, skiritai. as well as perhaps ele.

imagine killing own cc as to win a battle.

the 10% health and 10% capture points hellenic architecture that is a civ bonus of 3 civs mace, sparta and athen is good but not good enough, walls are waay too valuable to be compensated merely by this, perhaps if capture points got 25% bonus that could be somewhat helpful, keeping the +10% health. but id like lets say -10% pop thing to stay with sparta, and revert skiritai cost to 110. with 40 food 40 wood 20 metal. traintime to 13 sec from 15.

do you expect a rating system to exist that doesnt require you to play rated games to keep accurate? O_O tgs will never be an accurate descriptor of skill, its effectively impossible to measure. arbitrary and astronomically biased metric selection is basically astrology.

no @LetswaveaBook its my fault, i should feel ashamed for making him close his account, please dont do it @rm -rf i mean stan, dont close his account i know he cant do it himself, and its standard procedure to randomly ask for account close in a random thread from the moderator, and without closing account its impossible to not visit the forums, so dont close it, please.

I would like if the spartan hero gave move speed, as i remember in one of alphas, it had very high mobility infantry army if you used only skiritai and skirmishers, perhaps sword infs had more move speed, or ranked up units did? i do not remember, it would be really cool if ranked up units got better move speed also, specifically infantry, i mean that would make sense, maybe horses dont gain "move speed" by being in more wars, but more trained human beings should, not that i really like bringing logic into 0ad.

I like that sparta has no city walls, city walls are severely underused and underutilized in tgs and in 1v1s. But i dont like how sparta has not much to "compensate" for lack of stone walls. its largely an attack civs, you have to go and go early especially in tgs, as it has little to no cavalary ie high mobility options, late game advantages, etc. with skiritai being phase 2 advantage, and hero room instead of castle also, incentivizing earlier attack. if they would get some advantage like "+5% attack in enemy teritory" that would be cool, as well as id give iber that armor bonus when defending in own teritory, if possible.

yes i am crying trying to read your posts.

i cant stop crying thread, it will cry if it wants, it would be inhumane to force it to stop.

yes, i am a paradox, in a forum. we agree so please stop talking to me.

never spoke on math even once, so how could i have i offered any wrong math?

yes, i think it has increased, but i suppose it depends not only on the time that had passed, as old players get better, but also the rate of new players coming in, as well as the general "meta" of the game, how close it is to high quality comprehension of it, what opportunities there are for newer players to improve rate of their skill improvement, either through mentorship or youtube videos, etc. id say more popular the game, stronger the "strongest" players will be. if many new players come in, skill avg will drop, but the rating will inflate.

please try to put your posts in a grammar checking software, or ask others to paraphrase your intent, you will find proof that you cant speak english in a manner effective for communication. its not an accusation to discredit what you say, i promise you, as people you trust who speak fluent english, youll see.

yeah, you do write for the sake of writing clearly given what you post seems to have almost no substance if any. utility of the rating system is knowing a 1600 is better than a 1500, slightly, or that a 2000 is significantly better than a 1600. we all know it implicitly, through experience. @#$% the math, this is practical utility. is there an account named "nuborg" ? maybe ill make that one ahahaaha

It means more than anything else, it is of utility. exceptions exist but are easily discerned and discarded, so the utility of the rating remains, understand? ie, christopher, inactive, ever1 knows rating doesnt matter, but we still "rate" his skill level via the conventional rating system, ie 1800. yes, many ppl never play 1v1, but improve in skill with years of tg play, OR, many leave game and lose their skill while rating remans. all these exceptions, are easy to see, and account for. so utility of the rating system still remains. listing smurf accounts as a way to delegitimize the rating system is silly. we know they are smurfs as no new players with 0 rated games play that well, thereby they are disqualified from the rating apraisal, as well as whoever they beat is irrelevant. if we disregard all and any effect of smurfs, its easy to utilize the rating system effectively. very few players farm rating, and those who do are easily caught in the act as their skill doenst get farmed with it. "can" but doesnt happen much. still amazed you think smurfs beating "higher number rated" players is somehow an argument against the accuracy of the rating system.

The words and sentences you write make no sense, if someone could translate it to me id be happy to respond. what does "it would take less time for me to draw the rating distributions and come back to with you. even if i defeat all your points 1 by 1 you will again run us in an infinite loop" mean? rating distributions? the dont matter, i dont care about how effective the rating system is in recreating whatever distribution you have in mind. yes, players who dont actively play 1v1s rated, will have innacurate to their skill ratings, very often, this is self evident.

i meant more so, if someone had enough skill to reach x rating, that even inflation didnt erode, active players skill improvement didnt erode, then they should be left the bulletin board honors. If you played 1v1s consistently, rated, youd know your level based on win/loss rate vs players of various ratings, ive said this already. key is vs active 1v1 playing players, so the rating isnt stale. as well as, if you play rated, vs varity of levels mostly around your shown rating level your rating would show your skill very accurately, maybe 50 points +- Idk what level you are, but id say 1400-1500 perhaps, just as a very rough estimate.