alre

yeah temple healing auras don't stack

there are many solutions to this problem, I just proposed the simplest, most effective one. we are not likely to see any other solution implemented soon, even if there are some possible ways that could go very far in terms of optimization and further opportunities. yes, this is true, absolute economy of resources can't be achieved without a significant rebalance of the gameplay (there is more than one way to do this too). anyway, consider level 1 CS miss ~50% of throws at max distance.

I didn't like cyberpunk's gameplay. the map and the artistic direction were top notch though. I'm not an integralist for open world games, free roaming is not the most important part of a game to me, but I'm still waiting for when an open world RTS finally comes out!

no, I didn't change my mind, I just don't agree with you, even if you insist. be cool with that, we won't always be all in agreement.

cavalry already needs more micro than inf, and that's a reason why noobber players sometimes only play inf, and gameplay gets a bit boring under that level of skill. I'd like that level to go down rather than see it pushed up. I'm constantly saddened by people trying to make the learning curve of the game steeper, like you are doing, because 0AD actually has a good design document, that says that importance of high APM should not be stressed, but rather diminished when possible (understood, @real_tabasco_sauce?).

I don't need more excitement when controlling cav. it's already micro intensive enough.

... that if ranged attacks were made to always deal damage to the intended target, lag during battles could be cut down significantly, with little effort? Consequences on gameplay would be minimal, and other adjustments would also be possible, like varying damage depending on distance.

women reduced vision is indeed weird and poorly justified. there has already been discussion on this, but no patch yet for what I remember.

that means more micro. if you think horse archers are op, propose a change to make them weaker, not something that makes them just as strong but more difficult to use, they are already difficult enough. if you want to nerf cav death balls, come up with something that actually nerfs cav death balls. different lines of sight are fine. the cav units stands on a horse, also the cav unit is easier to use this way, especially for nubs. these motivations are good enough for me. anyway, it's not the end of the world.

the game changed a lot from A24, battles are a lot quicker now. where it was once important to stream reinforcements towards a current push, now it's more usual to just retreat when out of juice and regroup/pause to do eco/fortify. the game is different now and micro has changed too.

count me as well. I don't see benefit in the added micro for exploring and handling horse archers. those things are already noob-unfriendly. many have talked about why, he may just agree. besides, your own motivations are very weak.

I don't see the issue. the problem whith cavalry death balls is not vision. I guess we can equalize the vision ranges of cav and inf, but the way it is now is ok by me.

I considered something like that. I imagine it's hardly impactful or worth the micro, so it's fine by me. It's nothing like that. It's just a micro play option that provides a tiny buff to the corral strategy. good, because corrals have been significantly nerfed by the animals-by-age change, but personally, I would rather have the simpler setup.

I believe the values are a lot lower than they could be. but I don't like the idea at large, I don't see any fun in it, and I think it could actually harm gameplay if it was buffed. so I'd rather see it useless than used with profit.

it can and it did. in A24 it was quite important to maintain constant stream of reinforcements. granted, this was mostly true in bigger maps, but I appreciated that aspect of the game.

they can be edited selecting the "crossing arrows" symbol. if you need to try the same units many times, you can save the map you created, and then load it directly when opening the game with command line. there is a guide somewhere on the wiki.

probably already been written many times, but yeah: - right click on "no formation" in order to have no formation in use by default (current default is very bad for competitive play, and it's going to be worse in next alpha) - only use formations to regroup your men quickly, especially at the beginning of an engagement (usually after first contact happened without any use of formations) - end formations immediately after you created it. never leave units in formation while they are fighting. you can use attack-move for that, because attack-move immediately disbands any formation.

observers are currently able to talk to players if they want to, from game chat, not only from external tools. the game allows it because it's indeed a game and made for leisure, but it can easily be considered cheating if strategic information is passed.

there is already: ctrl+1 _ assign units to group 1 1 _ select group 1

I guess they are so stupid because you aren't supposed to look at them in that detail. do you think that Unit AI can be improved?

I'd like if the palisade was differentiated as being an anti-cav defense, specifically, as many proposed already, if it had special resistance to cav in order to slow it down properly. I'd like if palisades were more "spiky", it would make them look cooler and different than stone rocks, not just inferior. But I oppose adding aura damage if that means units stop to receive harm without going away. a cheap solution for that would be applying damage to units that attack spiky palisades - a kind of "thorns" attribute.

A brief guide to how to set the parameters in Pathfinder.xml the most important parameters you can find in Pathfinder.xml configuration file, are those called Clearance. Each passability class (humans are default class, elephants and such are in the "large" class) has its clearance value, which is the size of the square each units occupies in the map, and that affects the pathfinder. When you put units working at a mine, they will try to stay at clearance distance from each other, same when you order them to go to some point and you wait until they crowd it. Scaling up clearance value would have the most consequences, affecting how units space out when working, and how likely are they to get stuck. Clearance is defined pretty low in the xml file, before that it comes the Pushing section, which has many other parameters. Radius is the most important, and it's a value that multiplies the clearance size (actually, its diagonal) to make up the radius at which that units impresses maximum pushing to nearby units. You can extend area at which units push each other with StaticExtension and MovingExtension, which depend on wether the unit is moving or not. If you use values too large for pushing radius and/or StaticExtension, you will get units that try to get as packed as clearance allows, but then get pushed away and settle for a sparcer arrangement. this is ugly, and can also lead to units continuously pushing each other out of position while they are trying to work: 0 A.D. 2022-07-25 17-01-53.mp4 MovingExtension, on the other hand, can be larger, because it doesn't create those bad effects. StaticSpread and MovingSpread influence how progressive will be the pushing strenght in the range of StaticExtension and MovingExtension (inside clearance*radius, pushing strenght is maxed out). These parameters are not so relevant as the others, 0.6 is a good value (it prevents steps in the pushing strenght function). Values bigger than 0.6 extend the area a which pressure is maxed out. PressureStrength regulates the amount of slowdown to be impressed on units that are suffering heavy pushing (because they are too dense). Current value is very small and some little slowdown can be observed only by making two dense balls of units cross each other. In the following video, the value is raised to 20 (PressureDecay = 0): 0 A.D. 2022-07-25 17-48-19.mp4 You can see in the video that high pushing pressure (slowdown/friction) prevents dense blob by making denser units fall behind, and it's more realistic, but may feel too slow - consider this is is A26 which also feels slower becouse of acceleration. High values for PressureStrength can also give back strategical meaning to chockepoints. it's true, but it's inevitable. for wood chopping, units move in very messy obstruction maps. Also many obstacles are those built by the players.

It's very easy actually, it's just a couple of parameters. You just have to check how units behave while lumberjacking or mining, so it's not the case that they get suck. the main parameter is Pushing/Radius in simulation\data\Pathfinder.xml.

that's curious. either you go for early aggression, or you go for early eco + late aggression. what else would you want to do?

come on that's not an answer. why do you need that many units? do you play low pop games sometimes?