alre

I can help with UnitAI. could never make working animations though.

someone should make a patch to make territory-specific bonus available. we lack that feature.

- what if it's limited to infantry (less op) - what if it's a substantial temporary bonus for units that have just been trained (buff to reinforcements)

most probably. it's the only difference between units and siege pathfinder.

it doesn't.

make a team with your friends, and play team games.

actually, I just remembered I built a pretty long wall during a 1v1 against seeh in the last tournament. It was a classic wall case where I wanted to avoid being hit in the side after coming out bad from an attempted t2 infantry rush. Wasn't necessary in the end and it felt too slow to build. Mostly I think either prevent non-siege from attacking wall, or nerf wall and make it faster to build. also please balance the cost of walls segment vs stumps.

whenever I think about building walls, I will end up building palisades instead. units already prefer targeting units to walls, so I think taking out the possibility entirely can be beneficial. It will be a substantial buff thought, to walls and to iberians. chokepoints (never present in the maps used online) can be a pain point.

honestly, it seemed a bit too unbalanced to me. when jbc eco stopped at the beginning of the game, there was no going back already.

wouldn't that need a two-handed, longer spear?

nice, lively commentary, it reminds me of NoobRush. you should really use BoonGUI mod, it's good for playing and even more for spectating/watching replays.

that finite resources are a good thing is only true in a general sense, not regarding every single one of them. fields yield infinite food, breeding is also unlimited, there is no reason to force every alternative to be limited instead. however, one could indeed propose a single map with this feature (described in the map description), before having it as a standard for all maps (I don't think it's realistic to have most random generated maps with intelligently dosed fish depending on size and players number). farms are always easier to defend than fish, because you can place wherever you want, and they are trivial to fortify. you can't build fortifications on sea. of course if you have in mind a hypothetical map where all the fish is safely on one player side, and all other resources too, and the other side offers no advantage, well of course there is a player who will be almost guaranteed to win.

also possible, but how would you deal with technologies that increase the gathering speed of fishing boats?

currently, given the relative cost of making a dock and a fishing fleet, or, on the other hand, a mamned war fleet, I don't see much strategic depth in fishing: you do it, it's good while it works, at some time it will be over anyway. I think it would be better if fishing was more like a more exposed and more convenient alternative to farming, also in the long run: fish patches could give infinite food. of course one could make some math and balance the gathering speed and/or the limit on the number of boats that can fish from the same patch at the same time. what's your thoughts? I believe we can watch at AoE for direct comparison btw.

what?

bizantine acqueduct mechanic is interesting. even if acqueducts don't make a lot of sense for it, that kind of math could be more reasonably applied to trade network, and I'm curious to know which turn out to be the strategy implications.

lol it doesn't at my level. I amost never leave my units free to attack buildings at all. I would know.

actually, no, this poll was created by a single-player guy, and the meta wouldn't change by the slightest, not at >1200 level. this reminds me about when formations were enabled by default: the meta didn't change at all, but you could then tell a newbe miles ahead. it takes a minute to understand capture honestly. I don't like capture at all, but it's not complicated, and its quircks are not going away if it's just not the default anymore.

making an option is very good, but I wouldn't want that an option is introduced as an excuse for having a default that is actually inconvenient and thus bad for new players. changing preferred attack doesn't affect balance issues. capture-delete would still be there.

is the poll frozen somehow? my vote would be on capture, as it's basically always the best choice.

UnitAI is the routine automating unit behaviour, including units controlled by human players. PetraAI may be responsible for that switch, because UnitAI only ever triggers "preferred attack" which in A26 is conquer for units on buildings. Since A27, preferred attack is never conquer.

all formation allow for units to turn, unless the formation is moving, and the units are moving along. this means that if units are fighting they will be turning indipendently anyway.

games are not open source and only maintained by volunteers. it's an impossible comparison.

possible, but in my tests this does not translate well on 0ad battles. units turn at all times in a whim.

agree. melee inf being slow is their main weakness and it should stay that way imo. it characterizes them. also I don't quite support melee inf going insta-kill on othet melee. in any case, there should be testing and then some version of the change should be merged into the community mod for longer-term balance tuning. this is impossible, and also really unrelated.