Jump to content

maroder

WFG Programming Team
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    779

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

 Content Type 

Posts posted by maroder

  1. ===[COMPLETED]=== Terrain and Map Overhaul (Milestone: Alpha 25)

    in Official tasks

    Posted

    Regarding "Steppe" biome for random mainland. Because of the nature of the Steppe biome (no/ only a few trees), there will probably be big problems with the resource availability (especially wood). So if this biome comes up in the random biome choice for Mainland and the players are not prepared for it, then this may cause some frustration and aborted games.

    So is there a way to add automatically more wood as starting resource for this biome? Or an autoresearch tech, which reduces all wood costs?

    Further question: Does the resourceCounts in the biome .json work only for trees or also for stone/metal/hunt ect. ? Judging from the randombiome.js it is only trees, which would be sad.

  5. move fields away from the CC

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    On 12/05/2021 at 6:38 PM, hyperion said:

    This is indeed looks like a rebranded rotary mill, vastly different from farmland in DE as in one of the poll options. If you'd called it building wells with an irrigation aura I wouldn't have been confused. The issues I raised are with the farmland concept which is vastly different from what you did.

    Yes that's why I uploaded the mod to show people the difference.

    At the moment it seems like most people would prefer the farmland option, although I am not sure if what I made would be the option they had imagined. Also the second most voted option is to change nothing, so I am not sure what to do with this topic.

     @Stan`and the rest of the team, is it worth making a ticket/patch for this? Even if it will be probably only a reference for future discussion?

    • Like 1

  9. ===[COMPLETED]=== Terrain and Map Overhaul (Milestone: Alpha 25)

    in Official tasks

    Posted · Edited by maroder

    On 29/04/2021 at 4:25 PM, Stan` said:

    There are few steps

    1. Identify all the maps that are unfinished / broken and make a list
      1. Delete or update those maps.
    2. Identify textures that need to be replaced with the new ones from delenda est.
      1. Write a script to update the pmp files with the new texture references
      2. Write a script to update the js files with those new textures.
      3. Commit the new texture files
        1. Make sure their resolution are consistent eg no more than 2k for diffuse and norm, spec could be smaller like 1k
        2. Make sure they are named properly and adjust the scripts accordingly
      4. Update the maps
    3. Identify sub par props and make a list
      1. Delete or update those props. Consider support for Lods.
    4. (Optional) browse the map packs   around (eg balanced maps), and propose some new maps updated with the new textures.

    Here a first attempt at ordering the maps: * (the maps that are not mentioned should stay in their category)

    Map filter in each category:
        All
        Land (can you reach the opponent by land)
        Naval (need ships to reach the opponent)


    Category: Skirmish
        Move Skirmish Demo to Demo/Test maps
        Move Gallic Fields to Trigger Maps


    Category: Procedural (former "Random")
        Move RMS Test to Demo/Test maps
        Move Wall Demo to Demo/Test maps
        Move Jebel Barkal to Trigger Maps
        Move Extinct Volcano to Trigger Maps
        Move Danubius to Trigger Maps
        Move Polar Sea to Trigger Maps
        Move Survival of the Fittest to Trigger Maps
        Move Canyon to Arena
        Move Fortress to Arena
        Move Gear to Arena
        Move Harbor to Arena
        Move Hell's Pass to Arena
        Move Lion's Den to Arena
        Move Snowflake Searocks to Arena


    Category: Arena:
        Canyon
        Fortress
        Gear
        Harbor
        Hell's Pass
        Lion's Den
        Snowflake Searocks


    Category: Scenario
        Move all Trigger maps to Trigger maps
        Move all Demo, Test and Sandbox maps to Demo/Test maps
     
    Category: Trigger Maps
        Jebel Barkal
        Extinct Volcano
        Danubius
        Polar Sea
        Survival of the Fittest
        Gallic Fields    


    Category: Demo/Test maps
        All the demo/Test maps

     

    What to look out for to identify the unfinished/broken maps? All of the ones I tried work as I would expect.

  10. Balancing Citizen Soldiers (CS) (long shot)

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by maroder

    20 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

    @maroder I found a little bug in your mod: you are missing the icons for the CC upgrades. By default you get 3 purple blocks. I fixed it by copying 3 copies of the default civic centre icon into the correct folder, and everything works smoothly now. If you want different icons to represent different upgrade routes just send me the images and I will implement it for you.  

    Well done!

    maroder fixed.zip 502 kB · 0 downloads

    thanks! my bad. didn't click on the art folder while making the zip. Fixed now (in first post).

    Btw@Stan`CZ for Czech Republic or is this the shorthand for Citizen Soldiers? :D

  11. Balancing Citizen Soldiers (CS) (long shot)

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by maroder

    17 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

    As I see things, we allready have the tools for creating booming/rushing/turtling gameplay

    Booming: the unit that does this are women.

    Turtling: This can be done by building towers and citizen soldiers.

    Rushing: This could be done by cavalry or p2 champions.

    The thing is that though we have the tools for it, it does not work out like this. That does not mean the citizen soldier concept is flawed, but rather that our citizen soldier concept is ill-balanced.

    I generally agree, but problem I see is that booming with women is only in P1 and that turtling is basically late P2/P3 activity, because in P1 you need to invest all your resources in building your eco. And building one sentry tower is not what I would call turtling.

    So the strategies don't change that much over the course of the game and the snowball effect still happens. Not sure if there is a good way to balance this without bigger changes to the concept as my proposal or what @wowgetoffyourcellphone said.

  14. Balancing Citizen Soldiers (CS) (long shot)

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    5 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    To be fair, I think this may come down to the fact that most people play DE in single player rather than against other humans. I imagine "the sense of urgency" would be heightened if it's played against another human being. :) 

    True. And the AI is tailored to EA so it feels a little bit stronger there, even in single player.

  16. Balancing Citizen Soldiers (CS) (long shot)

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    33 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

    Much discussion in other forum topics has been oriented to:

    1.  increasing feasibility of rushes (risk/reward) and adjusting p1 defenses 
    2. civ differentiation and inclusion of things such as p2 champs (more popular) and p2 siege (less popular) If mercs were fixed, they could also be used like this. This would expand the Action versus time/phase envelope.
    3. ranged unit running speeds (needed anyway but allows for raiding bases that have archers
    4. unit train times, (barrack vs cc, or general)

    A combination of these things could work to allow more fighting and more complex decisions at every stage of the game. In p1 you would need to decide how much defenses you might need, how big your eco is compared to enemies, how much army you could attack with. All of this is informed with scouting.

    I agree with all of this.

    But the underlying problem of the balancing is the Citizen Soldier concept. As long as the units you use for eco are the same that do rushing/defense, the best strategy is always too boom as fast as possible. This proposal should be regarded in combination with the changes you mentioned and not on its own, so you still should have a different gameplay with each civ and you should be able to take different strategies, but it could imo help to disentangle the booming=turteling connection.

  17. Balancing Citizen Soldiers (CS) (long shot)

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    I see what you mean, but most players (I think) have played other RTS games, and the citizen-soldier concept isn't in any of them, so this "feeling" from soldiers doing guard duty isn't out of place. If anything, EA may "feel" too fast to those players. But in DE, soldiers don't have no other abilities. They do have the ability to build, so they can be used for other things than just standing around. There are also many capturable objects on a DE map, which makes scouting and capturing things with your soldiers a beneficial thing to do. :) IMHO, EA maps are very static and boring, so you need your soldiers to be doing something else, else they feel useless for anything other than dying for the motherland.

    Yes true. It is also critique on a very high level :D  as I said, I like most of the other things as the more diverse maps, mercenary camps, farmlands ect. I think it just comes down to preference regarding the CS concept. And if this concept should stay, it is just hard to balance with different strategies. The difference between DE and EA feels to me like a little bit like the difference between chess and bullet chess. One is more strategic and the other one has this felling of urgency that you need to make decision more quickly.

    • Haha 1

  18. Balancing Citizen Soldiers (CS) (long shot)

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    Since A24 is out there has been much discussion about the balancing, not only between factions but also between different strategies. But as @ValihrAntexplained it here:

    Because of the Citizen Solider concept the best strategy is (in most cases) just to boom as fast as you can. As most units fulfill economic as well as defensive/aggressive roles at the same time you cannot separate strategies. This is not in line with the vision of 0 A.D:

    " Single path to victory - It seems to be a trend that games cater to a specific strategy that is frequently used to attain a victory. That could be rushing, turtling, booming, etc. We recognize these are valid ways to win a game, but we will attempt to not favor one over another. Players should be able to successfully use (and adapt/change) any strategy to achieve a victory. " (citing from here: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/0AD_The_Vision)

    Another problem is that this "booming is the best" gameplay leads to a huge snowball effect. So If a player is slower at the beginning, it is very likely that he cannot recover and will lose the game. This makes the game less dynamic and interesting. Being able to turn the situation around after some bad losses is much more fun than slowly losing to your opponent just because he has more units, because he was able to click faster in the first five minutes.

    The question is, how can this be balanced?

    In Delenda Est this is done by removing the Citizen Solider concept and using a wide technology tree with many pairwise techs, which forces the player to choose a strategy or to find a good balance between them. But this is also my main critique point with DE. While I like mostly all of the stuff in DE: new factions, better graphics, new features ect, the game feels slower to me. With 0 A.D being the only RTS I play it feels very frustrating to me not being able to use units for eco and it just "feels" slower when some units just stand around. The wide technology tree on the other hand is very interesting and let you do complex decisions, but I actually need to pause the game and read what each tech does and then decide what I want to do. This makes the game slower paced and more strategic (which is not necessarily bad, just personal preference), but it takes away from the fast pace and action, which is for me one of the key features of the main game.

    So how can Empires Ascendant balance this without removing the Citizen Solider concept and while keeping its fast pace?

    What if the player had with each phase the opportunity to specifically choose one of the three strategies? So a decision to upgrade your CC or research a technology which gives you either an economic, an aggressive or a defensive boost just for this phase.

    Possible improvements from this mechanic:

    • This would allow that each strategy is a legitimate choice in each phase, so a p1 turtle or a p2 push would be possible with all factions.
    • It creates a a true "balanced" rock-paper-scissor system 
    • This would also acknowledge the importance of scouting (in all phases): if you have the information about the strategy of you opponent, you will be able to counter it.
    • It removes the huge snowball effect that is present at the moment and could allow a player to comeback after a bad start
    •  It is easy enough to not make the game "slower" but enforces the ability to choose specific strategies.

    Here is a mod as a proof of concept:empires-extended.zip

     

    Note that this is only a very basic implementation of the idea. It only features positive auras which give you faster unit production and better gather rates for the economic strategy, quicker build times and more arrows for defensive buildings for the defensive strategy and more attack, movement speed and loot for the aggressive strategy. But this idea could be coupled with different art for the CCs, different options to produce units or even unlock new buildings ect.

    Note 2: the mod is a suggestion/concept for the future balance of 0 A.D is therefore for A25 / SVN

    So what do you all think? Besides the obvious: don't change anything about the gameplay.

     

    I have took some inspiration by the following threads and ideas:

     

    • Like 1

  24. what do we do with the defenses of phase 1?

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    11 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    What do we do with the Sentry tower?

     

    Should we block it? So you force yourself to research a technology to unlock it?

     

    And the palisade? Should it be weaker

    Sentry towers and palisades should be valid option to turtle in P1 but should be very weak as soon as the enemy has phased up. Maybe a P2 tech like "fire arrows" would be nice, which is especially an anti palisade / sentry tower tech.

    • Like 4
    • Confused 1

  25. Midas (actively convert mercenaries)

    in Game Modification

    Posted

    13 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    could we have conversions like Age of empires?

    We could have it surely. The only question is how many units should/would be able to do that. Should it work via an extra "capturing" bar, similar to capturing buildings, should it be dependent on the time the unit is inside the aura or should it work just like the capturing mechanic?

    The other thing is that this code is"quick and dirty", which is ok because only one unit uses it. To make a more elaborate mechanic you have to spend a lot more time.

×
×
  • Create New...