alre

Hello everybody, I'm opening this thread to review past changes introduced into community mod. If one, some, or all changes that have been playtested with the community mod are approved here by the community, they can be merged into the main game. I hope this process fosters thrust towards introducing new changes in the community mod, as they don't need to be permanent (changes to the main game are also not permanent actually, but we as the community have the responsibility to manage the community mod). I invite everybody to share their opinion, before opening any poll, please don't be shy, any feedback is important.

very good idea if you'll ask me. my only concern is the possible overcomputation and how that can be limited. some tipe of enforced transparency would be nice too, but that is not the hard part. if we waited the base game devs for a gui rework, there would be nothing like boongui around. macros are a good opportunity for seeing some interesting AI work being tried. this said, it's true that, in game design, some "dumb" and easily automatable actions are important for player experience. I wouldn't consider skill gap though, that's so overrated.

pity, I liked the skirmisher adjustments, but voted no because of changes to slingers.

I was adding to that. ranking is one thing, survivability is another.

it would be nice if roman hastati were more survivable and oriented to ranking. if you think about roman doctrine of war, a lot of it revolved around keeping their men alive. contrary to most of their relatives, ordered retreat was pretty important to romans.

what about practice? how does everybody feel about changes to cc? I think we could take it a lot further. We haven't seen big changes to the meta in this regard.

I think this is also true for acceleration, which could also possibly go away. I don't like the idea of having technologies, by their own description, "increase spead and acceleration". Just say it gets faster.

battle axes are actually lighter than normal axes, quicker to handle and sharper, because of how flesh is different than wood.

I believe it's the added one. (otherwise that bounus becomes crazy, like +52.4%) I think it's more understandable if it's just a building bonus. no matter if it doesn't affect late game.

formula: n / sum (for i from 0 to n-1) of (0.9 ^ i)

cumulated effect of proposed bonus: 1 farmer per field: +0% food income 2 farmer per field: +5.3% food income 3 farmer per field: +10.7% food income 4 farmer per field: +16.3% food income 5 farmer per field: +22.1% food income so if you keep your farms fully staffed, it's +22% food income. it's not wild but it's very good from the moment you get farms.

I think the non-diminishing returns are a very big buff actually, even if late. must be well evaluated. maybe it's better to just keep the building bonus.

I'm talking about styling too. Also functionality rules, ask any designer really.

boonguy mod is really good for play and replays. it doesn't change the main menu but the main menu is not that bad IMO, it's just old style, which is fine. true, some are great, most are meh. or maybe, just throw "default map" out of the window, because it's so annoying when you are switching/testing mods a lot.

there has been in the past some discussion about reframing champ spear cav as cataphracts (which is mostly how they are called in game). cataphracts would be slower than usual cav and have a lot more pierce armor, and would be very good ranged inf counters, interpreting well the classical AoE cav role.

true that. btw, non-parabolic range query do a L1 selection first, and then compute euclidean distances. Anyway, one could also switch off height sensitive queries based on maps, bc most maps are flat, but that's not a great solution if you want the game to play well on 3d maps too.

.

I believe that the "small incremental changes" philosophy was more useful when changes came from alpha to alpha, and a lot of different changes would stack, some of which weren't much thought trough from a gameplay perspective. with community mod all changes are gameplay changes, and even when they were daring enough, they proved to be rather conservative. I don't think we need a big cavalry change, but I don't think a big change (cavalry or other) would be too risk to take.

what about changing the multiplier for inf spears and pikes? 5x maybe?

it's called "introducing a new subject".

what I meant is I don't see noticeable effects of acceleration on inf vs cav gameplay. unit chasing with equal speed units is different in this regard, although one must factor running.

that's the idea.

no es lo q tu pides, pero sabes q si tienes unidads en su cuarteles asas van a ganar experiencia con el tiempo?

melee inf should all deal twice the damage it deals now. that would solve the problem.

I'm guessing 99999 m/s2 would still be hardly noticeable. let's hear for the math of @LetswaveaBook.