LetswaveaBook

What might be a nice idea is to allow Seleucids to build a single colony in p1 in their own territory. Mercenaries would still be limited to p2. That would be something that makes the Seleucids different from any other faction.

@berhudar, people were supposed to schedule their own games. However that never happened and I could no longer bother to babysit and left the tournament alone.

I think that for act of differentiating factions, Sparta has the art disadvantage. Sparta has the least amount of different units neither does it have many special buildings. While I think we should make the most of the art currently available to us, we need to accept more art is particularly useful for making Sparta feel more unique.

It is nice to see a patch that creates an unique identity for Persians. However what about Persian Architecture? Is it supposed to be as useless as in A25?

Not every strategy needs to look stellar, so I consider that as a positive. There is some virtue in trying to solve all design problems in one single go. I would welcome a general discussion about which advantages become available in which phase. As long as that discussion is not conclusive, we are limited to considering things case to case.

It seems like the patch for axe champions in p2 is accepted: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4704 @borg-, what do you think about https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4310 ? Any suggestions for alternatives?

The biggest problem of balancing is that everyone says that the team needs to change this and that. It is like waiting for the bus to arrive while not realizing that you are the bus driver of your own life. Very little people actually realize that everyone has the power to do so. I think that attitude needs to change and this proposal can help with that.

This is exactly one situations I tested. Okay, the javelin cavalry need to turn and accelerate. So it is more difficult to avoid the first hit. The spear cavalry get 1 hit and then stop. But this is only the first hit. After that, the javelin cavalry have moved and it is the turn for the spear cavalry to accelerate. So it works in both ways. My assumption is that in A26 it will get you even less kills.

Unfortunately, I can't provide feedback on that. In the game I played, there were always opposing units in the way.

I thought in this example the difference in units lost is a factor 2. I don't want to be sarcastic, but do these situations really exist or is it wishful thinking?

Tom0ad is live now

I continued some testing and I tried to move 12 javelin cavalry past 24 spear cavalry and ran over the length of 12 long spartan wall pieces. I lost 3 javelin cavalry and 3 more were heavily damaged, while the remaining 6 units had very little damage. I tried the same scenario in A25 and I would be left with only 4 javelin cavalry. So I tend to think spear cavalry aren't very good at chasing down the slower javelin cavalry in A26.

I think you are right in the fact that a single test does not provide a clear imange on what to expect. So I ran some tests again. If 1 sword cavalry chases 1 javelin cavalry over the length of 12 long spartan wall pices, then we have the result I meantioned earlier The javelin cavalry is left with 63 HP. If 24 sword cavalry chase 12 javelin cavalry, then along the same distance only, I lost only 1 javelin cavalry and the remaining group had about 900 HP left. So acceleration has the potential to really troll engagements.

In a similar test: In A25, the javelin cavalry receives after the first hit 12 more hits while being chased over a set distance. In A26, the javelin cavalry receives after the first hit 7 more hits while being chased over a set distance. I seems that it is a fair estimate to say that melee cavalry can't chase down javelin cavalry as good as they could in A25 and during the escaping phase, the javelin cavalry receives about 1/3rd less hits in A26.

Consider the following situation: a javelin cavalry runs away from a chasing spear cavalry. In A25, the javelin cavalry moves at constant speed, whereas the spear cavalry stops at some points to attack and then chases again with full speed. In A25, the javelin cavalry moves at constant speed, whereas the spear cavalry stops at some points to attack and then chases again but it loses some time by needing to accelerate. So I ran a test in the scenario editor. I had a javelin cavalry and waited until the spear cavalry did the first hit. Then immediately afterwards I ran away for a set amount of distance which I believe to be about 250 meters. In A25, the javelin cavalry receives after the first hit 6 more hits while being chased over this distance. In A26, the javelin cavalry receives after the first hit 4 more hits while being chased over this distance.

My aim would be to let every feature of any faction feel unique. Currently, the Kushites have the unique monumental architecture technology and it is a pity that it doesn't offer a lot of usefulness. Unlike the Persian Architecture unique technology, it only affects civic buildings (CCs, temples and houses). I wanted to create a patch that energizes well with the existing features of the Kushites. The Kushite faction has 5 different champions and I wanted to stress on that. Two of them are build at temples, which are civic buildings. So therefore I saw it fitting to increase the batch training speed for civic buildings. https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4310 Also, to double on the champion aspect: I enabled the axe infantry champion in p2 adding to the Kushite identity of a varied p2 army. https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4704 I hope that these changes can help to making playing as the Kushites a truly unique experience.

I played a multiplayer game with proposal @real_tabasco_sauce. That patch turn the axe cav into a formidable fighter. However in a mixed army, the axe cavalry is also one of the first units to die. So that tends to balance. I think the unit is not majorly imbalanced. The speed is indeed a possible issue though.

Everyone praises A25, but I think A25 has some problems and overlapping is a serious one.

When I searched on the internet for Persian Ice houses, the idea of adding the to the game felt very good. The most logical bonus would be food related and I like the idea of a food trickle as it encourages to build more than a single one. It seems natural to compare the cost of the ice house to a farmer. So for 5 farmers we have a cost of 250 food for training 5 women 100 wood for a field + 75 wood for building the housing for 5 women, 75 seconds construction time. Without farming upgrades, they produce as much as 5 ice houses (as proposed) in the mod. But the cost of the Ice houses is 500 wood and 250 seconds build time. So fields seem preferable to me even if you lack all farming upgrades. Currently the main advantage of the building seems to be that it does not require population space. @borg- I am interested what your ideas are behind these numbers. I think this is a better idea. If the cost and the gain per Ice house are higher, then instead of being spammed, each one brings a more noticeable impact. My suggestion would be 100 wood+100 stone+50 seconds build time. So at the start of the game, you have a unique way of using your stone. If you have some leftover stone at the start, you can fully utilize it for ice houses, but it means you need to go to stone before getting the 3rd barracks. So that would give the interesting question on how many ice houses you build at the start of the game and how you combine it with your build order. Farming gets more efficient as more eco technologies are being researched. The Ice house seems to lag behind more and more for every farming technology that gets researched. I think it would be fitting if the Persian Architecture tech also provided +20% resource tickle for ice houses (as well as a +20% territory boost).

I suggest a variation with a big hill in the middle on which a neutral fortress sits that can be captured. So on such a map, you would like to capture the fortress before the opposing team does. However sending a few troops there right from the start means you will suicide these units.

I have been modding a little today and I managed to create a variation of mainland where players start with walls.

I don't know if it is going to be slower in every situation. If you have extra hunt or berries, then in a 1v1, you recruiting some cavalry for rushing and defending against rushes feels to me as a must. In those cases, the suggested start does not seem disadvantageous to me. In the situation where there is no extra hunt or berries, i agree that the regular start looks better. But the biggest disadvantage seems to be on nomad starts.

Last week I played a game against DocterOrgans and he left the game ealry. Within a minute after I reach p3, he disconnects. At that moment I am ahead as he reaches p3 considerably later. I pause the game and he reconnects. Then we continue the game and after a while he disconnects again when he is at a major disadvantage. He returns shortly after and ask him if I DDOSed him, which I didn't do. He leaves the game again, I wait 10 minutes for him to return. Once I see that he doesn't return, I defeat his units, but that didn't grant points. I have the idea that he noticed he was behind and therefore left the game and tried to blaim it on his connection. I think it should count as a loss for him. It would be undesirable if people can just disconnect once they fall behind and then blame it on connectivity issues. 2022-06-05_0001 DocterOrgans run.zip

Tom0ad is live