LetswaveaBook
-
Posts
953 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Posts posted by LetswaveaBook
-
-
10 hours ago, alre said:
guys, do you use jav cav after p1? I feel they are pretty useless aside hunting women.
I think people underrate how good a combination of jav cav+melee cav is. The jav cav deal so much damage and the melee cav just can function a bit as a damage sponge. I enjoy going for the macedonian merc cav in p2 during TGs. If you go for merc cav, it is nice to have a stable for the upgrades and then you can use the stable for unit production. If you are curious for the results I used jav cav in all these uploads:
Also in the weirdjokes=boomer game we see BreakfastBurrito_007 using jav cav with the seleucid hero. At that point it is off course difficult to say if the cavalry would be more efficient than a push with siege and infantry, but the cavalry do have their advantages in some situations.
-
2
-
-
Jofursloft uploaded a video where Valihr went for cavalry archers. I think it shows that the cavalry did little damage, while in theory it looks attractive. From my own experience I know that unupgraded rank1 mounted archers miss a lot of their shots (champion chariots have a spread of 1, which makes them a lot better).
-
I had some games that I did not want to analyze in full, but I liked to show some things about them. On youtube we see a #shorts for some highlights and I thought that such a thing would be nice for those who do not want to spend 20 or more minutes to watch a game. So I have done some video emitting and got this. I think this format is nice to show some tricks that you can do.
-
1
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:
do you think a map generation mechanism that adds in berries or hunt if there would otherwise be none is a good solution?
What is a good solution is subjective. If you like a particular map type, you could create a mod. For team games, skill level is more important than extra berries. To be honest, I just play to have fun and most often I don't really care that much if one player gets an advantage in a game. If fair maps are desired, then I use feldmap.
So in the end it comes down to the question what you consider fun and that is a question everyone needs to answer for themselves.
What I believe in is an age of empires 2 approach to maps. If you want to use different maps, you could bring a different map and play on it.
-
18 hours ago, Yekaterina said:
if y = f(x) then your differential of f with respect to x is:
That does not work. First of all, that formula does not make sense if the limit does not exist. Secondly, you don't make the differential by that way, it is calculated that way. The differential of a function exists or does not, regardless of whether you can calculate it. So in that sense you don't make the differential.
-
1
-
-
I need to warn you. @Player of 0AD is a dirty boomer
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Yekaterina said:
Zusammen? (On the same side, togetherness
I could only agree on this if A46 would be named tesamen
-
Firstly I will name some things you can do if you are able to collect more resources than your opponent:
1. Transform your food economy to corrals and cavalry, which means you need less women and can get more army.
2. Get will to fight.
3. Build an wonder and get the glorious expansion technology. In the game replay section of the forum I posted some games where Havran did this to show it can be vialbe.
4. Make champions.
I don't believe any of these options themselves create imbalance. The imbalance is caused by the fact that some players are able to put themselves into a position to use these options. Only eliminating champions as an option wont stop the players in the better position to use these options.
Extra berries allow for some extra boom and a quick ram attack. Delaying the rate at which rams can be produced does not really solve the problem. I saw Havran using option 3 to get a population advantage and if you make it slower to attack Havrans team, option 3 will only get more potent as it is more difficult to punish. Also you do not need siege to hit your opponent hard. I think a bigger problem for early knock-outs is the fact that an army benefits so much from the final pierce armor technology as that allows you to take very favourable fights.
Making a fortress a requirement to produce rams seems bad to me, as you force people to build fortresses even if they want to play aggressively.
15 hours ago, chrstgtr said:Ive been in too many games where my ally lost CC and all before my side did anything.
If I had to make a guess, that has probably more to do with bad play/teamwork than that it has to with bad design. Why did your ally lost his CC so early? Didn't his team help him?
-
9 hours ago, Player of 0AD said:
Overall conclusion: Dont change anything
That opinion was expected for you ;P
9 hours ago, Player of 0AD said:Ptolemies are not too OP, for example they lack ranged champions and easy counter against siege and sword cavalry.
How could you say that they lack an easy counter against siege if you mentioned it a few lines earlier? That counter is called Ptolemy soter and is available from the CC.
9 hours ago, Player of 0AD said:No. Some people say that for example the Iberian team bonus is better than this, and they might be right.
The Iberian team bonus is the best team bonus there is. So you are possible comparing two things which are both OP. In a language that @Yekaterina understands if we have two values of infinity with one being bigger, thus ∞>∞, then it does not mean the right hand expression is small.
12 hours ago, Yekaterina said:2. Early camel archers -> enemy cannot counter easily -> mess up enemy eco without slowing down your own.
This is not true. They are best suited for hit and run tactics and stay on large range. The issue is that if you try to kill a women from 60 meters, you need like 20 arrows, because of inaccuracy. The inaccuracy really keeps them down. Also they are slower than Javelin cavalry. However with Ptolemies you can afford to build the stable early and get the +10% speed tech. I like to get this technology in my rushes, without it the rush feels very risky. I feel the camel rush is only feasible because of the strong economy. Nerfing them feels not needed to me.
12 hours ago, chrstgtr said:Watch the games with the most skilled players to see what is actually OP vs. well/poorly used in other games. Ptol, Carth, Gauls, Iber, Romans, Sparta, and Persians are all frequently played at more or less the same frequency indicating that ptol is in fact not OP. Other civs just need to get slightly better.
In team games, balance is vastly different because people need to adapt to the fact that they will be playing with players of different skill level. If all players have similar skill levels, I think the popularity of many of those factions would drop. In 1v1s, Ptolemies are the very best and no other faction has a fair chance against them IMHO. Some might disagree and say that Iberians have a fair chance against them. If this is true, then I would say no there faction has a fair chance against Ptolemies or Iberians. They are a cut above of the rest. I agree mostly with the 9 points that Yekaterina made. I would add a number 10 to that: Can train heroes from the CC. This gives a great timing advantage over most other factions. I think the option to nerf the heroes is the most fitting of the 3 suggestions. I would also propose an indirect nerf: rebalance so that the pikeman is no longer OP.
13 hours ago, Yekaterina said:3. No food trickle please, or half the current food trickle.
The food trickle is really nice in the first 2 minutes, where it allows you to get more units and let that snowball for you. In the lategame it is negligible. So halving it does not feel good. It also is historically accurate as Egypt was the breadbasket for the middle east. Maybe a team bonus that gives mercenaries shorter train time might also be fitting for them, but for me we can keep it as it is.
-
2
-
-
7 hours ago, DerekO said:
Would this be a great idea to push 0 A.D. into the public and would allow it to reach it's true stage?
I think it would not help to push the game to the public.
I think games that are popular result in high prizepool tournament. I don't see it automatically working the other way around.
-
2
-
-
Zama as the place of the battle of Zama.
-
1
-
-
These maps with unbalanced food resources are a choice.
For competitive 1v1s I think this mod is fair. However if you want just a fun game, the normal mainland is fine.
-
1
-
-
On 30/09/2021 at 11:04 PM, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:
elieve that I already outlined my opinion much earlier regarding a very obvious Spartan gimmick:
Be able to train Spartans at phase 1. Simply speaking Sparta without Spartans is stupid.
I like the idea of having Spartans in p1 and I think it is not problematic for balance. However what I consider a undesirable consequence, is that the Spartans then would only have a single type of champion and it is available in p1
Any ideas for additional champion units for Sparta or will it just be their current Spartiates?
-
1
-
-
If I did not miss a step, this is what I did:
Downloaded the code.
Found the kushite architecture tech and changed its cost.
inserted in the command line
$ cd ./0ad
$ svn diff --diff-cmd diff -x "-U 99999" > changes.patch
That created a document changes.patch in the 0ad folder, which I uploaded to
https://code.wildfiregames.com/differential/diff/create/
and now we have https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4310
-
2
-
-
A new feature might make it easier for the AI to build walls. Whenever you try to build a wall, you can not build it if a building/obstruction is in between. If it would be such that if a building/obstruction is in between the endpoints, it would create two wall pieces: One from the starting point to the building/obstruction and one from the building/obstruction to the endpoint. For multiple buildings/obstruction it would work idem dito. That would also make it easier to avoid gaps.
For the AI we then could just order it to build square walls around the CC and any buildings/obstruction in between should not be a problem.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Dasaavawar said:
I tried to capture his fortress that was close to 2 defense towers.
That seems like a mistake, especially if the fortress is garrisoned.
1 hour ago, Dasaavawar said:I remember having like 70 champion cavalry,
That is a good ammount of champion cavalry. The issue probably is that you did not use them very well. They might lose to elephants one-on-one, but they have several other advantages. They can run around the opposing base and try to kill all vulnerable units that you see or capture building. 70 champion cavalry could fairly quickly be able to capture fully garrisoned towers even. What you need to avoid is to attack the elephants head on. If the opponent attacks with the elephants, you should use the cavalry to take out the supporting units. If the elephants are alone, you could defeat them.
Could you share the replay on the forum?
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, davidsrsb said:
I don't understand the historical reason why cavalry are far more effective against towers than infantry. Apart from rams, the traditional attack on towers was bundles of kindling or fire arrows
In 0ad cavalry is not significantly more effective against towers. Cavalry only has the advantage of being better at avoiding and running away from them.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Dasaavawar said:
Elephants are too OP. Everytime I play with a friend and this guy introduces like 40 Elephants in the battlefield, I know I'm already defeated.
The asian elephants cost around 550 resources and are 6.5 times as durable against pierce damage as a CS pikeman. I don't think that they are hugely problematic.
40 Elephants is no small force. I assume it is more the size of the army that trouble you rather than the units. There are other strong options available and probably your friend would be as difficult to beat if he used different (champion) units.
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Gurken Khan said:
Not sure if you're trolling. https://www.nucleairnederland.nl/en/themes/waste/ :
I would not blame you for accusing me of trolling, but I was serious about the 1 m^3. You found a source and the my numbers were a little off. In the linked article, we find infographic (part II - in dutch). The Netherlands produces 1100 m^3 LMRA (laag middel radioactief afval- low or medium radiactive waste), which is something that is created for medical isotopes, smoke detectors and other things. The production by the nuclear plant is 4.5 m^2 in the HRA (hoog radioactief afval-highly radiactive waste). So that means that it is 4.5 m^3 instead of 1 m^3. However the main bulk of radioactive waste is not highly radioactive and is not produced by nuclear plants.
It has to be said that the Netherlands only has a single fairly small nuclear plant. There have been some hypothetical suggestions to store nuclear waste in some underground locations called zoutholtes in the Dutch language(In Dutch we have a few words that can both have its plural being written differently, so the plural of zoutholte can be both zoutholtes and zoutholten). I don't know the proper translation for that, but I think salt caverns could be accurate. I am referring to underground cavities that are the result of mining operations. Anyway, these underground locations are deep underground and also big enough to store a lot of stuff.
So I don't think storing the radioactive waste should be a problem and this world would also be rich with other places where it can be dumped. The only problem is the Not-in-my-backyard issue. Even if location is safe, local residents could still be protesting against it.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Gurken Khan said:
I don't think there is a single deposit site for highly radioactive material anywhere in the world operative; handling that stuff for a million of years will also cost a lot of money.
In the Netherlands we have a nuclear plant as well. It is awful that it produces about 1 m^3 highly radioactive waste per year! Every year radioactive waste will be produced. If it would operate 1000 years, we would need to find a cube with sides of 10 meters to store it. For the global population, it was super smart to rely on fossils (and aid to irreversible climate change) rather than producing nuclear waste.
9 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:@#$%ushima was not a modern reactor design.
The @#$%ushima problem was also caused by cutting corners on safety. If you build a nuclear reactor in Japan, you need to be prepared for tsunamies and earthquakes.
3 hours ago, Genava55 said:Cherry picking
I believe this is what will happen whenever this debate starts. People like to do cherry picking.
-
On 06/10/2021 at 6:12 PM, DerekO said:
I'm thinking of October 9th
Is there all ready a bracket for the tournament? Can we play the games and send a recording or are the games planned to be live viewable? I could play some games on the 9th, but won't be online all day.
Prizepool is not relevant to me.
-
2 hours ago, Player of 0AD said:
Letswaveabook is a pocket player, booms up and goes for champion archers and elite-healers. Meanwhile his border ally rushes his border opponent a lot...
That seems like booming is not a lot of fun.
-
I used to play almost solely 1v1s as I felt they are more competitive. Personally I don't enjoy games were 8 players boom, one is behind and his team loses because they are practically 3v4. I would not mind uploading the losses of my team, but as a bad team member I mostly feel that when my team loses it is because someone else let us down heavily (The game in which I wanted to delete 2 women and deleted 80 military units instead is one that I conveniently ignore). I also cast some interesting games on my youtube channel, but I don't envy casting long team games there. Neither do I want to overload @mysticjim e-mail.
Recently I had some fun team games and I would like to upload some special strategies. I like to try some unconventional strategies, as just standard booming is just boring. A25 gives more room for full on cavalry aggression and that is a good thing.
Game descriptions below if you are not afraid of spoilers:
SpoilerGame 1: It is a game where I played as Carthaginians on Eurasian steppe. The map lends itself for opening with CS jav cav. After an early p2 these jav cav can be supported by mercs. After some good hits on the opposing flank, I decide to research colonization and drop a cheap CC on the edge of the opposing flanks territory. That allows me to build some towers that can range the fields of my opponent. I keep producing cavalry and it is a nice game where I opened with just a single barracks and just a few fields. So it really shows you how weak your eco can look, while still being able to support 200 population.
Game2: Vaccine-poison and I are pocket players. Vaccine-poison gets rushed by a mauryan pocket player. That rush gets cleaned up, basically because we help each other and the remaining jav cav can't escape the faster spear cavalry . Knowing that the Mauryan player has probably weaker Eco, I decide to return the favour. I double down on the macedonian mercenary cavalry and have some spear cavalry as a meatshield. The maurya player loses lots of unit in the attack, and I share that information with my team. Then vaccine-poison uses that opportunity to strike for the maurya pocket again once p3 is reached. I still have the cavalry alive and we double the misery for the maurya player. In the mean time, I help my flank player with minor numbers and he is able to hold. With the Maurya player dealt with, we move to the other pocket player Havran, who has surprisingly an wonder for the extra population. I think it is nice that it shows that Macedons Merc cav can be relied on for a p2 attack and it also shows that even with alexander the great capturing the Maurya CC is still difficult.
Game 3: This is just a boom game. What is interesting is that Havran decided to build a wonder again on reaching p3. With the extra +20% population, he will be one of the most potent players in the game. I think it is an interesting strategy to go for the +20% population.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:
I have a few issues with barracks/stable unit training. It is a slow mechanic that has no extra cost and makes players lazy with how they upgrade their units. It is rarely used, and it is also hard to tell how much xp/rank the units inside have gained.
The problem with it being hard to tell how much rank units have gained would be easy to solve. If you select the barracks, you see the different unit types. By making it such that a rank 3 unit would be regarded as a different unit, this problem would be (partially) solved.
It is indeed a slow mechanic. A nice experiment is the reduced xp for hoplites currently granted by the hoplite tradition tech. That means hoplites promote twice as fast. So by garrisoning your hoplites for 100 seconds, you get it from 0 xp to rank3. However I think it is most often better to have your hoplites work for 100 seconds. However for hoplites, it is not the worst thing you could do and players could experiment with this.
Also when I rushed a bit and at the moment I considered that my cavalry would no longer be able to cause casualties, I tried during some game to garrison them. The cavalry gain about 25% in value after 150 seconds of garrisoning, which seems as efficient as hunting in the middle of the map. Though garrisoning for xp seems reasonable, in many cases in hindsight it would have been better to have them patrol (or hunt) in the neutral territory to spot any attacks or expansions.
-
2
-
Ptolemies need nerfing
in Balancing Discussions
Posted
I feel that attack ground could be nice, but it does not solve the entire issue. Ptol have all ranged units in their barracks, so Ptol is able to take as much advantage from this as any faction.
For 1v1s, what makes Ptol a real powerhouse is that their economy is unmatched. When they reach p3, they can train a hero elephant from the CC. If you weren't max pop by then you could train mercenaries for 39 metal. If you kill one of their heroes, there are 2 more excellent option left for the Ptolemies.
I think you might be able to do a build with decent eco and have the elephant hero out before minute 10 (under 11 minutes is certainly possible). I will try to practice that.