alre

It works good to me, charging doesn't happen anymore. I tried on Altlas everything I could think about moving and formations.

I support this idea very much. However, how should ships fight other ships?

the bug came out somewhere between version 25698 and 25717. I don't remember how to build from source so I can't find a more specific pointer right now.

As long as I can notice from up to date SVN, the charging bug hasn't been fixed. This completely trows out of balance the game for those players skilled enough to exploit it, or maybe those who aren't used to attack-move I guess. An arbitrary subset of players that understand the working of the game or just get how to exploit this faulted part of it. from a MP point of view, this is definitely a release breaker. In the lobby, @Angen said it may be hard to fix, so what's the plan? release the game with a knowingly broken balance?

that reconstruction of quinquiremes is discredited. they had five lines of rowers but multiple rowers handled the same oar, so that in fact there were 2-3 lines of oars and no more.

Off-topic now, but anyway I just wanted to say that any use of the resume I can think of, to tweak the rating adjustment, would fail in mamy possible cases. The only goal of a team game is to make your team win, so that's the only thing that should be considered to possibly compute team games rating adjustments IMHO. If you want, open another thread making a different proposal. Father is a well known smurf. Also many other players have created smurf accounts called 'Sister', 'Mother', etc. ~~~~ Going back on topic, it seems to me that there are two main possibilities for "rating fading": 1) periodical reset/step reset/decrease of rating for all players [aboove a certain rating]. This option encourages continuous competitiveness, players who don't keep gaining significant 1v1 victories lose positions to more active players. 2) only players that are inactive for some time are hidden from the current leaderboard. They may lose points or just be marked as inactive, but in any case they are only affected if they don't play at all, and they could avoid the change by playing unrated, team games, or at most a safe rated game against a weaker player. We can assume most players if not all won't do any of this, so the leaderboard will be effectively refreshed anyway. One may also think about keeping two different rating systems, one with some kind of reset/fading and one without, but I think that for simplicity only one main rating value should be shown for each player, the other better being visible in their personal statistics.

I don't think using the summary can possibly be fair.

durability increase = (damage necessary to kill a unit with improved armor / damage necessary to kill that unit with base armor) - 1 armory techs level 1 and 2 -> durability increase of 11% armory techs level 3 -> durability increase of 23%

Obviously, the proportion of damage dealt is obtained by taking out the "1 -" and is e^( ln(0.9) * armour value of the target ). If one tries to compute the proportion of damage dealt to two different units whith two different armor values, it comes out that a unit whith 1 more armor than another, take 90% (0.9) of the damage that the less armored unit takes. Computing the inverse of the proportion of damage that a unit takes from enemy blows gives us a measure of 'durability' of that unit. That's the proportion of damage one have to deal to that unit to overcome its armor. One additional level of armor increases the durability of some unit by 1/90% ~= 11%. Two additional levels of armor increase durability by 1/(90%)^2 ~= 23%.

I can play too, with SVN. I don't have RC2 right now, and I'd rather not install a third version of the game too.

yes that's the one. sorry it's a bit frustrating to have to write in the forum from the phone as it doesn't work on the pc browsers.

this comes up very often. Then people start to discuss how and when this rating adjustment should be done, and no agreement is reached. Still, most players agree some adjustment should be done. I suggest we collect a number of proposals and we make a poll.

I've done some test and simply increasing people clearance would help a lot to overcome the "smooshing" effect wow mentioned. Now the value is 0.8, which makes me think it was set 1 some time before, but in fact 1 seems better to me. What do you think? @wraitii

5) they are not used to games with a MP lobby. It's a rare feat nowadays.

isn't this whole charging thing a bug? I'm kind of impaired now at writing in the forum, but I was doing some testing and soldiers charge only when in a idle formation. I thought it was formations use of running speed leaking somehow.

what's your point? the kushite temple should have people painted in red? anyway, the time reference for the kushite faction in 0AD should include the 25th dinasty and the meroitic kingdom I suppose.

and you can tell women apart from men instead?

Ramming as with Grapjas charge would be nice to see in the game, but would not add any real strategic layer to it. At the moment, naval warfare in the game displays heavy imbalance among civs, lack of rock-paper-scissors mechanincs, and also, I think, unsatisfactory scale of fleets and battles. All these problems stay. All this, together with ships OP-ness and lack of viable counterplay, makes naval maps pretty unpopular in the MP lobby.

I can't write in the forum from my PC. I'm doing this from my cell phone. I have a windows computer, and I usually use chrome, but I also tried edge and IE, and there I can't even log in. It just ignores my tries. In chrome I'm logged in and when I try to submit a reply, it just doesn't save it. Clearing the cache doesn't work, restarting the PC doesn't either. This problem first came out yesterday.

Name me one battle where light infantry is reported to have done more damage than the phalanx. @PyrrhicVictoryGuy is quite right about the macedonian phalanx baing designed to beat hoplite formation, at Chaeronea already it was sufficient for the victory, most probably without cavalry intervention. Hoplites were also very little mobile (excluding reformed troups by Epaminondas) and had no advantage over the macedonian phalanx. But we may also consider that the spear did never come out of use, and saw heavy employement in late roman legions, when general weaponry and armor had changed again.

No, I don't think it's great to have a civ that is uber OP, a couple more that are still quite OP, and a bunch of civs that are mostly crap. We can do better. Also, since when "for gameplay purpose" we want meatshields? To me, that's basically an exploit of UnitAI, and I don't actually think I know other games that have such units (maybe there are, but they are no way necessary to an RTS). Persian shield bearers, for example, could be a better fit for a pierce-resistant unit, but I had the impression that meatshields as a concept was quite unpopular anyway, I'm surprised you like it so much.

just keep their high hack armor, but decrease their pierce armor. so simple. for a reference look at AoE I 'phalanx' unit. don't agree here. we can see macedonian phalanx was not historically invincible, so making it historically accurate doesn't mean that it becomes invincible at all. just really effective in some specific circumstances. anyway, I hope we agree pikes are op, so I'm actually proposing a nerf.

yes, more of the same kind. when I say "10 archer", count some 4 skirmishers instead, and the result is the same. wouldn't you agree that the phalanx was significantly less manouvrable than - as a typical comparison - the roman legion? speed of units in game is based more on general "manouvrability" than on actual speed of moving soldiers.

@BreakfastBurrito_007 it's not a matter of archer or slingers, they all deal the same kind of damage. Unless you are facing a 100% melee opponent, pikes are still OP in a25, compared to other melee infantry.

it certainly depends on the civ, but ptole boom is not bad! and they use pikes a lot. false. I've repeated the test above and it's sufficient to alter the proportions a bit in favour of archers (40 melee + 20 archers) to make pikes prevail on swords as well. and pikes are cheaper too! truth is pikes are extremely resistant to everything, and they don't have counters. also their role in game is a mistification of their historical one. see the liked thread.