vinme

I can either tell you to push your limits, or that if you tried hard you wouldve been worse off, all depends on context, on what exactly you define "trying hard" as. So you what you said could mean 2 totally opposite, things.

No, overexherting is harmfull, and will only give net loss, if you are too stupid to explain something trying to do the impossible will only cause you to waste time and effort. We can either explain it, or we cant, trying hard has nothing to do with improving the results, only worseining them. Also this is more so about multiple itteration of events, so it may work 1/10 times, but the 9/10 times it doesnt causes more harm than that 1/10. In thinking not succeeding per 1 try is fine, as you can generally get some value out of it so after starting over or re adressing the issue you are a bit closer to solving it. Also another issue is knowing your limitations, which is sometimes impossible without trial and error, so there is occasionally value in pushing the limit and failing on purpose if you feel you are ignorant of your limitations. Try hards never win, they merely sacrifice what they were given by luck or life just to feel like they are in controll/accomplished something/deserve what they have.

So dont try hard, but if you have to try hard to succeed you have already lost. All that does not come fluidly without overextention, overexertion defines your limitations.

the one vali did videos on? that was when a lot more players were more active i feel, especially higher level i mean. yeah ofc 1500, 1600+ etc should be added LATER initially just host 1300+ one for bare minimum competence level, you cant let 900s in it will be totally pointless. using weekends/friday for hosting could be useful, like 3 day tournaments, friday-sunday evenings. What i wanted to say was making rating brackets will be essential for any bare minimum level of compettetiveness, which in turn is the sole factor ppl will be interested in, thatll make them wanna invest their time and effort in the tournament. ofc haivng lower rated brackets also would be great but for now prob best 1300+ and 1300-

- In game name: vinme- Interested for the following schedules: daily, European afternoon (13 GMT) - BO1 or BO3?: BO1

Great idea, id be willing to play. id advise to make a tournament that seems so easy that theres no way that there will be complication/issues/problems, like overshoot on biting what you can chew, baby bites. this way is best, as there isnt consistent tournament culture/foundation in 0ad and before it gets established through many tournaments, there will be less interest/higher difficulty of pulling it off for a variety of reasons. So id advise best of 1, more dynamic, less tiresome to players so more are willing to play, doesnt take months to organize and a year to finish like 16 or 32 player best of 3 with 1 game per week. 8 players seems like the best sizing to start with, not too small not too large, maybe add in rating requirements later, when the demand is there like 1500+ 1600+ etc. also would be interesting to see 1800+ 4 player tournament, also later ofc. Id extremely strongly advise doing tournaments in single bursts, in terms of time frame, ive seen a few tournaments have very frustrating and tiresome issues with the plan being that they'd last week or 2 but then dragging on for months, etc. PPL wont prioritize 0ad, since its just a very niche game, if they stop feeling like playing they'll just not come online for weeks, even after signing up for a tournament, or having an upcoming match, its much more predictable, that som1 saying they are willing to play in the next 1-3 days will more likely than not, follow through compared to say having ppl promise theyll play every week which i assure you, will backfire 99% and cause complications. even 1 day tournaments, seem fine if you ask me, since itll take each player 3 games tops, if its best of 1. just need to have them be online on a specific time, and have lets say 3 hours free. So the main issue im foreseeing is abandoment, so make sure you have a contingency for this, ie 0 tolerance policy, if you miss that x schedule, then tournament host gets involved, sets time immediately, and whoever misses that one forefits by default. The second issue im forseeing is player online time alignment, this should be heavily focused on so it goes as smoothly as possible, setting it up thoroughly so no issues arise later. And the final issue is ofc, ppl joining it in the first place, which i already mentioned would be improved with less commitment demanding formats, but also, best if from announcement, to the tournament being filled up, minimal time passes, so initial players who have joined, do not lose interest/forget about it. ideally, with the fastest paced 1 day tournament, you announce the tournament, in 1 day it ges filled, you announce who plays who, and next day it happens, and finishes so the whole thing would take 2 days form announcement to finish. setting specific start time, for each day gameplay, would be very valuable as when the rounds progress, people will always be coming online on the same time and there will be no ambiguity/room for issues and delays in terms of people cooperating in pms to oragnize meetups, delays in round progressions as many ppl inevitably cant progress when opponent doesnt respond or when they cant agree on time. Also for contingency on abandon, people should "log" themselves coming online in forums, and organize there, so there is history.

if theres anyone who already knows this stuff well and can easily make such simple adjustments for me, we can work together and make a totally fixed/improved 0ad mod prob within a day or 2 tops since it takes such minimal effort for me to figure out proper balance for functional, viable but not op options and it would be equally as easy for someone well versed in the programming aspects to simply adjust the values. Im thinking building costs, unit trantime, unit cost, etc. as well as if possible, mapgen rate of metal/stone/extras or if possible, and i assume this is more of a stretch make a fair balanaced maps mod, better than a25 one which had many issues with variability such as 400 foods not being balanced, hunts varying in distance making 1 side get half the walktime often resulting in basically half the value,etc i also would really like to add, if possible, removed buildings, or buildings that have already been designed/have existed in the code, but never used,(i have seen some in some special maps maybe a year or 2 ago like strange wood structures) im sure i could make use of/bring into the game with balance a lot of such buildings/ideas. specifically, id bring back stoas.

i see, but im not planning on figuring this stuff out further, so i wont even start to make a mod 5% of the way that i wont finish. TY for mod. if theres anyone who already knows this stuff well and can easily make such simple adjustments for me, we can work together and make a totally fixed/improved 0ad mod prob within a day or 2 tops since it takes such minimal effort for me to figure out proper balance for functional, viable but not op options and it would be equally easy for someone well versed in this stuff to simply adjust the values. in fact ill post this separately.

@LetswaveaBook Thanks a lot this is pretty interesting! i agree that the wall regen is too strong, for some reason i accounted for 150 per sec ram dmg, i think 100 per sec makes more sense maybe call it "great wall of china" XD i have just realized that ministers arent champs, so they dont get affected by hero so giving them champ class would be good. i meant minister armor debuff as in comparing ministers to conventional swordinf champs haivng 8, and ministers having 4 thereby ministers having -4 and i meant give -2 instead, ie 6. i didnt mean give them 2. from bonus ideas, did you implement only 5% hp? i wanna note that i didnt intend that and initial "fix" ideas to work in same version, and it does not make sense with the limit of 9 also. techs are all great, imperial academy is very interesting also. i will definitely look more closely into it tomorrow.

i was thinking about exp upgrade+hero+minister xp heal working together as a whole, so youd get them all to suppliment eachother. ofc in this case, keeping the 20% less upgrade more expensive would be important, prob 800-1200 food and same amount metal. and hero would be fine actually, given its total @#$% otherwise, rn keeping it at -20%.

just had an idea for ministers, make them be like healers but they give exp at 7.5 per sec.

not moving, but giving fortress the option to get techs AS WELL, so blacksmiths would still function normally. i specified this because blacksmith only has 1 garrison capacity, so you cant use ministers for any blacksmith techs, leaving only eco(also unusable farmstead/storehouse 1 space) and p3 ing(measly 1500 res, in in of itself wont justify making ministers adn even if it did somehow, stil boring only 1 avenue might as well say in minister description (allows cheaper p3) since it would be the only thing thats done. also, i wouldnt want this to be too op, so using castle as another cost/timing buffer not to allow insta op cheap tech gain works. since castle has 20 capacity, it can get garrisoned by ministers. i was even considering writing giving castle tech to allow blacksmith techs from castle by like 30 sec 200 wood costing tech but felt would be too large a buffer. speeding up a barac by 2x is basically same or similar at least to adding 1 barac worth of value lets say 300+buildtime implications=600 so 2x faster by 5 ministers would be quite effective, if 9 minister model, i feel this would be fine but if not, quite likely it would be too op, especially if abusing it by placing barac close to eco, and garisoning b4 train, ungarison after batching. ofc ministers gie so much variety of value, EVEN BUILDTIME so it will be hard to balance, blacksmith tech profit+p3 profit+eco bonus+build bonus+traintime bonus(if added)+of course can not forget about fighting.

its not about "i wouldve done it differnetly" id never say game is horrible becuase "i woudve done it differnently" since i put litearlly 0 effort into it, if its in ANY way good thats fine. but if its bad in some way, ill say, not if its differnet to what i feel is ideal but if its literally bad, ie unusable mechanics, totally, or totally broken mechanics/civs. as for ideas ill give some for han only, since i hope new civ can be cool and viable for example make han castle 20% xp requirement tech 25% as expensive as b4(from 2400 total to 600 total) give ministers 2x bonus so + (from 2%)4% eco/tech cost/build bonuses and give castle ability to get blacksmith techs (so ministers can be utilized FOR SOMETHING for a cost of making castle, but only 1 tech at a time). give ministers only 2 armor debuff not 4 and add 20% to dps, so 12 per 1 sec. also description of minister building says "train 9 ministers" if limit is 9, remove that limit. cap minister total bonus effect to 80% for techs and buildtime, 25% for eco. change building limit of imperial ministry form 1 to 3, allow to get BOTH techs 50% hp and -50% traintime for ministers but make them cost 600 not 400 each. make han imperial academy cost 150 100 so 250 total minerals, or even go as low as 200 total so its actually usable instead of stupidly expensive. 2.5x the promotion/vision heroes promotion bonus from -20% to -50%. now more preferential parts not about fixing unusable mechanics: give wall heal hero +150hp per sec to walls within 60 meters, instead of +10heal sec passive. give champion bonus hero +50% capture for heroes and +20% dmg instead of +2 capture prior.to use with 8 capture rate ministers. make castle 2400 techs be 25% not 20%. some bonus ideas for ministers: make it so initial ministers give less value, so lets say if keeping 2% and 4 armor/10 dps and all, but each minister has passive of "+5% to all bonuses as well as minister hp per 1 other existing minister present) with cap of 20 so 21 will each give each other 2x hp and bonus leading to 4% and all. in this case, this will allow for ministers to have 600 hp(200x2 x1.5) with tech+ 21 ministers but ofc quickly detireorates as few are left. in this case, keep building limit to 2 i think. more theoretically: similar thing can be made by 9 ministers, making them very strong if all 9 are alive but id say in this case do growing cost, ie per 1 minister made, cost should increase by 100 metal 100 food increasing 7 times total(1 owned at start) final minister costing 800 800. each new minister has +2% more bonus than last one and gives flat 50 hp/5 dmg bonus to all ministers including itself or new trained ones. so last one will have 18% bonus and total bonus will be 83%, still capped by same 25% for eco, but otherwise not. if 1 dies, eco bonuses should get redistributed so you cant mass 9 18% ones. ofc total cost will be huge 7200 food/wood. 50X9 is 450 and 5x9=45 so in total 9 ministers will each have 650 hp 55 dps or with 50% hp 975 but ofc reduced as they die incentivizing retreat as some die to refill and atack again.

if so, could som1 make it for me? i can give values, nothing complicated ofc.

yes, because i wanna watch the whole game ive played and i do have the first half. the second half is of the SAME use as the first half. also, even without rejoin, even if my initial join of a game was midway, to spec, id want the replay, maybe i saw some good play i wanted to rewatch? absurd question, it worked in a25 just fine, as it was supposed to. in fact its so obvious any viewing of game should be and has been saved i dont even know what your trying to pull here.

disconnected, and game saved from start till disconnect. rejoined, but 0 record of 15 more min of play, after rejoining.

ty

the 0ad website lists some and then adds "many other small tweaks" at the end, where can i see complete changes list?

how does this work? is it based on tg? then just "perceieved skill" of player will dictate that, ie som1 who is perceieved as 1400 but is 1600 will give him wrose team balance overal than if it was opposite. so it may just be that weirdjokes, darkcity, vinme are seen as less skilled than they are, so when game is balanced they are given advanatageous teams. also depends im sure on players database, ie whoever they play with more, and whoever playes better when playing with them.

i want anyone reading this, who studies rhetoric, to note how he not once gave an example. 1. was "this discussin" and the other topic i made. ie extremely general, vague, not adressing anything specific, thereby NOT GIVING AN EXAMPLE. 2.general accusation of GENERAL toxicity, again NOT AN EXAMPLE. 3.apparently i get extremely angry when i lose, again NO EXAMPLE. 4. i blame everything on other people, apparently and act like im perfect, but wait.. theres no example of this occuring, its again ANOTHER ACCUSATION. hahaha i say what you do, then you do it again, not adressing what i say, bringing in NEW totally empty baseless bs point and sputters im certain you are not even planning of ever adressing from the moment you even think of them. your mental point of origin is "how to i get a gotcha moment on vinme" not "how do i think like a sane human being who actaully wants to say what they believe, not what they think will make them appear better and those who they emotionally get offended by look worse"

how is this qualified as "antics" ? my behaviour is neither amusing, silly or strange(standard definition of antics). define toxic, again with arbitrary allegations, ie something that cant be proven and is interpretable by feelings, just like insult and such. i never hate no nubs, ie inexperienced bad players, i even coach many of them in 1v1s for fun, i have 0 problems or anomous towards a player that tries to play well but just cant. i do get annoyed by people who are annoying, ie intentionally losing, even when told what to do, intentionally not doing it out of malice or stubbornness(foten not that they believe im incorrect, but they just dont want to do it, becuase they feel like it), then they deny any wrong doing, and accuse me of wrong doing. if they simply admit they made a mistake or that they werent correct to intentionally lose, or be unreasonable, id leave them alone, but sometimes they dont and they try to blame me instead. i dont get angry when i lose, i enjoy games where odds are against me the most, given usually won games are easy and there is no challenge, plenty of room to make mistakes and still wind up ahead. i blame everything on other people and act like im perfect? how so? can you elaborate on this obviously empty and baseless insult/point and sputter, as you see im giving you the pretend benefit of the doubt, ie im still letting you explain, even though saying something of this sort WITHOUT PROOF is point and sputter by default. i dont pretend to be uncertain about things im certain about, this is often misinterpreted by mentally weak people as arrogance, becuase they believe somehow, being soft and pretend polite, in conversation is a virtue that will absolve them of any inapropriate behaviour becuase they are "nice". acting uncertain, or timid, indirect, pretending to expect equal or respectable opinions from another, who has proven to not be deserving of any respect is NOT humility, its stupidity. "it coudlnt be me"? thats just a moot point, accusing someone of being arrogant or conceited, self assured etc. how is that an argument? i can say same about you, and about 100% of all people, given everyone believes what they think, obviously, thats self evident, literally. i still give people all the room to explain their opinions, question them, etc, adress what they say thoroughly, instead of skimming like you did, which is for a fact arrogant and proof of exactly the thing you had described. you must understand that profanities, are just words, they dont determine a persons character whatsoever, 1 person being 100% polite is in no way better or more respectable, than another who uses profanities. in fact polite people are generally the most malevolent and manipulative are the ones who are polite given they generally hide their intent and people who have reason to put effort into hiding their intent are dishonest. generally less malevolent people have less reason to be dishonest. we must all seek to question and be weary of polite people.

annoying with my language? do you mean i affect people to the core, ie my words sting because i point out something they dont want to admit to, or face? i did not insult woodpeck, or even say anything that could be interpreted as insulting, before he kicked me, i didnt even speak to him i believe, so he merely kicked me because of stupidity, ie "he paused, so he must be at fault" instead of looking at things objectively. i believe he was deeply innapropriate as a host, by kicking one of the players, and im sure my team wouldnt have been happy, and neither would enemy team, pretty sure he was also in the enemy team, this also greatly deligitimizes his hosts, but we all know how no1 cares, sadly, about host quality, given we have juarca, whose hosts are still joined, even though hes a notorious rage quitter, ending 10, 12, 15 etc min games, becuase he didnt play well, got bad kd, etc. he didnt consult others, ie "should i kick vinme? " or something similar.

oh and i forgot, my antics? what antics? can give at least 1 example? another empty accusation, and statment "people" lol, what people, its just you, who tries to word things to state emotional empty attacks, as fact. "im right, everyone knows im right, and anyone whod doubt me is clearly wrong and not worth talking to" every time one of your empty attacks gets easily dismantled you move on to another point and sputter, theres no end to it, so i ask you adress replies, instead of posting more and more endless point and sputters hoping something sticks.

yes, personal emotion, ie you have emotional bias, and spew bullshit malicious nonsense with "polite" pretend undertone, to try and discredit me. Id say for a fact, that would be very well defined as "lasing out" so yes, you are lashing out. unhinged pargraphs? what part did you find unhinged, please give at least 1 example, given you accuse me of writing many paragraphs, this task should be very simple, but ofc its not, given you have 0 basis for your pointing and sputtering. you shouldve gotten more screenshots to convince people of what exactly? im sure there are people who were specs, whod confirm what happened, and i assume you wont accuse me of denying anything that happened, that did happen. im just ranting at people? every sentence i write has a point, and i dont get derailed to unrelated subjects, there is no "Rant" there you go again @BreakfastBurrito_007 again with another empty insult for the thousandth time, 0 self respect clearly. the reason i got kicked, was becuase woodpecker was being unreasonable, for whatever reason. do you want people, to put up with cheating, yours and other peoples shameful behaviour, in relation to me simply opposing cheating, saying things like "just dont worry about it" or "you are overreacting" , "its just a game" ruins the game, people who actively promote in this manner, cheating, and help cheaters, dont deserve any respect whatsoever and are not to be taken seriously. the host was the only one who decided, to kick me, there was NO discussion among players, the spectators of course are irrelevant given they had no right to decide what us players should do, but they also didnt side with said, at all whatsoever. again another accusation, its tiresome, but id rather reply to this nonsense, to avoid someone, who is just skimming and not putting effort into looking at details, to misinterpret you or what you write as in any way reasonable, polite, legitimate or respectable. its rare for a person to have 90% of what they say/write come out as pure manipulative virtue signalling bs,i guess thats some sick form of accomplishment in a sense to be so motivated by unhinged emotion almost all that you say is wrong, and no this isnt an insult, its my opinion that i fully believe in, 90% of what you say is total bs.

this time i was in @Rockss tg host, and saidrdz joined, i ask rocks to specify no dance, rule to which he agreed, and he stated "no dancing allowed". afterwards said said he would dance, planned to dance in that game intentionally. then they talked in spanish i believe, after which some time passed and said still hadn't agreed to not dancing. i dont like rocks who refused to remove him, instead repeatedly asking me to "please start, its just a game" etc, instead of asking said "please dont dance, its just a game" im sure he did so because said was his friend, so hed rather side with him, and proliferate cheating, disrespect a player who doesnt cheat by removing him. Acero also tried to pretend there was any discussion to be had on this obvious matter of not allowing cheating players in games. he said something along the lines of "i think we must reach a reasonable compromise, we are all reasonable people here after all" "you need to see things from other peoples perspective" or "you are arrogant, you are so sure of youself" etc, playing with words to sound fake polite while spewing bs, i asked what saidrdz's side was, to which he replied something like "maybe he doesnt think dance is cheating" which i quickly debunked obviously, with game history of how turnrate slowing was implemented in a24, to counter dance, and even after it caused issues, it only was somewhat reduced, still not to same extent as a23 though.how we all agreed, over years to make dance not allowed, as it was rampant in early years and its undeniable for anyone who has played vs dance, it makes game worse, repettetive, boring, with power of dance abuse forcing all to dance. i think people just dont care, theyd allow host to remove me, over a cheating player. so i got removed from the tg for not readying,because player admitted to wanting to cheat. to whoever has finished reading my post, please post below, if you think dancing is acceptable, and if so why.