KKaslana

I would like to share and discuss this way of booming with other players:

Perhaps when she feels better. Why weirdJokes in particular? I would any player above a threshold (1300-1400) into my hosted game, with a few exceptions. Whether other hosts would permit me to play in their games is another issue that I am not very concerned about.

Agreed, in my opinion the stats should be adjusted to -20%, similar to the bonus of Britons and Gauls in A23.

List of usernames: Christoffel-Symbol, Christoffel-Symbol1, 2, 3, ..., 8, Sevda, Elena137, Sixth-Serenade (I gave her my password and it became hers), lagrange, Kallen (initially mine but she guessed my password and stole it)... Sometimes I play as her on her laptop and few people could notice. I do join as spectator at weekends and I quite often see you play, but I don't think you noticed me. It seems that either our IP or her hardware address has been put on a blacklist, which could explain. The interesting problem is, certain people spread rumours about how other people play... For example, I like mass cavalry attack at minute 7-10 with at least 25 cavalry units, but some people keep claiming that I am a fast boomer and ask me to boom instead of rush whenever I play. Booming is not my preferred style of playing but for the greater good of the team I often boom as they asked. In terms of civilization, I don't have a strong preference but I think Ptolemies have extremely strong economy and can win any battle close to their base, but they lack manouvreability due to pikemen, therefore they will fail on large maps against cavalry. Iberian champion cavalry is OP but the civ as a whole is irritating to play with because of the walls which obstruct your resource gathering. Spartans have the strongest infantry and manoeuvreability but they seem to lose to Ptolemaic economy and Iberian champion cavalry. This doesn't apply for me I am afraid, I get banned when I try this. I can confirm that they are all gone. When we returned to school after Christmas break, I kept receiving 'authentication error' from the lobby. Kate's solution was letting me use her smurf accounts, so she produced a list of her accounts and I tried all of them systematically. Some of these were banned in mere seconds meanwhile others lasted a few hours before they are banned. Quite a few weeks ago - sometime in late January. I do not remember her saying this and I have not taught her how to bypass any bans. I am aware of some methods myself but I haven't told her yet. Would you like me to teach her?

I am afraid I cannot agree with your viewpoint here. Sometimes I just remain idle and observe lobby conversations, without interacting with anyone and few people ever noticed me. Approximately 1/3 of the conversation is about advertising games and asking for players to join; another 1/3 is post-mortem of games where players compliment each other or insult each other; about 1/4 is smurf speculation and the remaining parts are in other languages that I cannot understand. Out of all of the smurf speculations I have observed so far (at least 20 cases), there had only been 2 correct guesses; all of the other attempts were wrong, a 10% accuracy. An interesting observation was, the speculators themselves were absolutely convinced with their reasoning and refused to listen to other player's guesses. The deduction reasoning of the smurf speculators roughly follows these 3 paths: 1. Who does this playstyle resemble? 2. Who could invent this name? 3. The style of language used by this smurf. Once a player satisfies all 3 criteria, then the speculator is convinced of this player's identity. Intuitively, this logic is sound, however, one must consider the possibility of non-unique solutions to the problem and the plausibility of a player changing their strategy. If one would like to conceal their identity, they would alter their use of language and playstyle, even if it means hindering their skills slightly. These often throw the speculators off-course and wrong an innocent player while leaving the real culprits amok. On the case of Yekaterina, as a fellow student in the same university as her, I can responsibly tell you that she has been ill since last Thursday evening and any potential smurfs you saw since then couldn't have been her. Furthermore, a technical difficulty specific to Eduroam (the WiFi network in our university) prevents more than 1 account from logging in simultaneously, that means, if she is online, then I must be offline. This problem first appeared in January 2022 - I believe she has not been able to make another account since then. I have watched her try to create another account over VPN, different HWID spoofers but all of her attempts failed and resulted in her being banned. Therefore, Emperior's claim that Yekaterina 'is still smurfing' is wrong. We used to swap laptops to play the game, so at times, I was playing behind what appeared to be Yekaterina, on her laptop. Sometimes people could notice but most of the time people never knew a change! One week ago, I found a method to circumvent this bug and enjoy myself in the lobby independent of her. However, I have not taught her how to do it yet! Therefore she still does not have the ability to create another account, at least when she is in the university. I doubt that you will believe anything that I say, which is expected considering I am always anonymous and rarely participate in lobby games. However, I would like to inform you that even the things you most firmly believe in could be wrong. Assumptions will remain speculative until they are proven or set as an axiom.

Can confirm. I was destroyed in merely 10 minutes when I tried to play a boom strategy against extreme Catalina. When I tried to rush it, I ended up slowing down my own economy without dealing significant damage. Catalina on very hard balanced mode is beatable, however, although it may be difficult for relatively new players. I will start to work on my own AI after repetitively beating a team of Petras for 2 years.

Please do, much appreciated! As stated in the discussions above, I cannot access the lobby through my own account while I am inside my university's network, which is not necessarily a problem as the ban does allow me to concentrate on my work. Sometimes I borrow Yekaterina's laptop to play, which might not be permitted neither. However, when I go home during a weekend, I change my IP address from my router, then delete all system cache and create a new account. In order to ensure that I am recognisable in the lobby, I have made a list of accounts in the form: Christoffel-Symboln where n is an integer equal to the number of accounts I have made; I will be Christoffel-Symbol8 this weekend. This systematic process is working quite well but constraining me to just 1 account and allowing access at all IPs would be much more convenient for me. Understood. Perhaps it is a bug specific to Eduroam and the fact that both of us have created more than 2 accounts and often share laptops or accounts. Sometimes I borrow her laptop simply because it has a superior GPU and a 144Hz screen... I will avoid that in the future. I am curious about whether the lobby checks our hardware. If I log into my account on her laptop and play, then she logs into her account after I leave, will both of us be banned? My apologies, I had created approximately 5 accounts in winter 2020 as I wasn't aware of the regulations. Fortunately, I have forgotten the names and passwords to all of these accounts so they will never cause you anymore trouble, hopefully. I can see some reasons to this rule, but it is often the case that our accounts get deleted after a few weeks (error: account does not exist) for no apparent reason and we have to return with a new one. Christoffel-Symbol3 and Christoffel-Symbol5 came into existence because of this. If the single account you award me with (be it Christoffel-Symbol0 or Christoffel-Symbol9) does not get deleted, then I will not make any more accounts. If it does get deleted, I will report the bug on the forum. Thank you for your understanding, @user1

The game suddenly crashed during a major cavalry battle. These are the logs and replay, please tell me what went wrong and how to avoid similar crashes in the future. Thank you. mainlog.htmlinterestinglog.htmlcrashlog.zip Only the command.txt remained after the game. commands.txt There is another minor issue I need to bring up: during the game, I charged my cavalry into an Iberian player's base and he deleted his CC. There were enemy units inside the walls, and it took me approximately 1 minute to kill all of them, after which, the Iberian walls decayed to gaia and all of my cavalry were trapped inside like a jail. This is hugely inconvenient despite being unlikely to happen. My suggestion would be, let gaia doors open to anyone who wants to pass through, meanwhile, if the doors belong to a player, they should only open to that player's allies and not their enemies.

You can do the Carthaginian one, since you are a big fan of them. I will do the Macedonians instead.

If I could afford cavlary, I would prioritise it before mercenary infantry for their superior HP values and manoeuvrebility. My approach to playing the Kushites would be using a mixture of archers, swordsmen, pikemen, elephants and cavalry. They allow for a variety of unit types and different strategies, and I would like to mix up different units so that I am prepared for anything that my enemy is planning for me. With that being said, I am not the expert at playing Kushites; I would much prefer to use the Macedonians, Romans and Spartans. I may upload a Youtube video detailing how I play with the Kushites if there is a demand for it. Christoffel-Symbol

This aggression towards us is not necessary. You yourself only rushed me once, out of all of the 1v1s we played. As you said, unfortunately, the strategy you saw from me was aimed at generating a sufficient army before 9:30, as that is the expected timing of the first attack from the very hard AI. In order to maximise population growth rate, I train very few men before 7:30, which leaves me vulnerable in the early stages. Furthermore, it relies on deleting women in late stages to free up space for champion units and siege weapons, which implies wasting resources. However, it is not necessary in a game against some AIs where the population capacity is 300, which is what I am used to. I also have another booming strategy which is significantly slower but is more immune to early rushes from a human player; normally I adopt this strategy for playing in the lobby. However, I know that you almost never rush, so the fastest method is worth the risk when playing a 1v1 against you. In conclusion, I am willing to share my strategies with anyone who is interested, however, they are not the most infallible approach to multiplayer games and the other players mentioned above are likely to be more skilled and knowledgeable than me in this respect. Christoffel-Symbol (Robin)

Hi @BreakfastBurrito_007! It's nice to have attack-ground functionality in 0ad, though I don't think it should be used in vanilla or mods depicting the same historical period, since there wasn't any AOE weapon available: 0ad archers can't do real AOE damage, and if you use them to attack-ground, it would be worse than attackmove, because some arrows will be wasted on the same target (maybe it should be possible to actually attack a zone rather than a point). Catapult dealing AOE damage isn't historically accurate either. Also the projectiles are too fast for attack-ground to make sense. But if someone wants to make 0ad mods with wizards, dragons, howitzers or stealth bombers, that will be awesome.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone Thank you for your suggestions. I will consider implementing this in a future version. Currently a25 and a26svn UnitAI.js files are not compatible - using the file from one version will cause errors in another one. I've tested both changes with a26svn. ret variable has two functions: (1) The maximum separation for chasing, as the codes suggest. (2) The trigger range for autotargeting when the unit is idle or on attackmove. In my opinion it isn't necessary that one value should be used for both fuctions, and (2) is much more important. I think it's good to decrease the trigger range for most units, but perhaps it's better to make it dependent on both vision and attackrange like in the case for defensive stance. However, I found removing autotargeting on dangerous animals problematic. I agree preemptive pest control can cause quite a lot of troubles too. If units are not able to autotarget dangerous animals, they won't attack the animals unless (1)The animals are attacking your unit - in this case he can retaliate, but your nearby units won't help. (2) You ordered your units to target a particular animal - in this case when your target is killed, your units will be idle and not able to attack nearby animals that are attacking you. This is very dangerous on maps with lots of animals attacking you, like Polar Sea, since you have to micro your units to kill the wolves one by one, otherwise they will stand idle and get killed. Fortunately, most popular maps don't have any dangerous animals.

@nani No, you should set MaxSameTurnMoves to 0. Unit overlapping happens because entities boxes are not respected, and pushing was intoduced to alleviate this effect, so smaller radius will make actual unit groups tighter, hence more unit overlapping. When you set MaxSameTurnMoves to 0, other parameters don't matter.

Sounds great!

Hi @Stan`, it's a bot I made in order to test my Res Gestae mod. By the way, it's called Catilina, not Catilini.

Re: @Micfild Yes, javs have higher armour for the case that they need to approach slingers or archers without melee units in front. However, even with higher armour, they will still lose, though they won't get massacred like in vanilla a24. Thier dps is high enough to make them the best choice for head-on battles. Re: @wowgetoffyourcellphone What weapons are these Cav Scouts using? Re: @andy5995 If you want to play with Catilina bot in vanilla, please do keep a copy of the version you have. It's made for testing purposes only, so its parameters are not optimized for vanilla a25. Since more features (like new techs, units and civs) will be added into Res Gestae, it's necessary to make Catilina adapted to these features - it's very likely that the future versions will not be compatible with vanilla. Since there will be a lot of extra work, I would not make a separate project. Also please have look at @Angen's Kiara bot, which has superior algorithms and I suppose it should always be compatible with vanilla.

Hi @Micfild. Thank you for your feedback. Don't worry if you can't beat medium level - easy level is too easy due to some petra features, but I will add more difficulty levels very soon. The attack strength of an unit is measured by their damage per second (dps), which is Attack value/Interval. For example, inf spear has 5.5/1=5.5, inf jav has 20/2.275=8.8, sling has 20/2.5=8, archer has 20/2.7=7.4, jav cav has 20/2.4=8.3. These attack intervals are much more realistic and they can make archers easier to balance. There are three reasons why javelin cavs have very short range: 1) Flanking with cavs is possible because ranged infantry has minimum range - when cavs get into this range, they won't be able to fight back, though in practice a large number of ranged infantry can still kill cavs, which is a desirable result. If jav cavs have longer range than the minimal range of ranged infs, flanking won't work. 2) Cavalries shouldn't simply be stronger, faster, and harder hitting versions of infantry - they have very different roles. Short range makes them unsuitable for fighting against infantry spears head on. 3) Historical accuracy. It's completely implausible that cavalries use javelins rather than spears as their primary weapons on the battlefield, so I just want these jav cavs be a representation of general light scouting cavalries ( I would replace them with lighter spear cavs if I have the models). I made them slightly faster, and slighlty weaker (not easy to see from the stats) than sword cavs, so that they are very good for hunting, raiding, capturing lone buildings and chasing fleeing enemies, but not as good as melee cavs for flanking ranged units ( though they can still do that). Short range prevents them to be used as machine guns behind infantry lines, which is very absurd. So give them a try, especially for raiding - they are not bad units. I haven't made any change on armour techs or elephants. So they receive the buffs if anf only if they do in vanilla a25. Yea, the elephants are quite op indeed. I will work on them when I start to deal with champs and civ differentiation. Make sure that you gather your army before fighting, and don't forget attackmove (hold ctrl + right click). Have fun!

I think in 0ad Attackmove is ctrl+RIGHT click. Left click doesn't work.

@alre @ChronA @LetswaveaBook Give it a try. I think this is what you guys want to do with the pathfinder. Just make sure to use attackmove (ctrl+click).

Second video: Macedonian side is using spear cavalries to flank Mauryan archers. In vanilla, it's better not to do this flanking manoeuvre. 1200603073_RgDemo4-1.m4v

0.0.3: Demo match between two default Catilina bots on small mainland. After three major battles, Persians crushed Macedonians with superior techs. Note that the behaviours of the AI changed a lot. RG0.0.3demo.mp4 =================================================================================================== 0.0.1: It takes me too much time to upload videos, so I will just upload these two videos to demonstrate the importance of tactics in Ress Gestae. The armies in these two videos are identical - Mauryan side is superior in number and cost. First video: without micro-management 2002149577_RgDemo3.m4v

Hello everyone! I'm Nagasushi. Some days ago I tried to register a forum account, but unfortunately it didn't get approved, so I have to borrow this account from someone to make a post for my new mod Res Gestae. Please download from my Github link here or at the end of this post. https://github.com/Nagasushi2021/Res_Gestae Res Gestae is intended to be a 'small overhaul mod', which changes many aspects of the game without diverging too far from vanilla, or adding too many complicated mechanics that will be hard to be adapted for the future versions of 0ad. We endeavour to provided a balanced gameplay that will be attested by mathematical calculations and matches between AIs and humans. We will also aim to make sure that the AI included in this mod will employ diversified strategies and tactics at the difficulties that will suit everyone, from absolute beginners to the multiplayer pros. Furthermore, there is an emphasis on the tactics, strategies, and particularly on the viability of diversified gameplay styles. Also as the name suggests, we draw our inspiration from real world history, which means we will try to emulate the military tactics they used, their army composition, and more particular features of each civilisation. Outline of the initial version: Pathfinder: twisted pathfinder parameters in order to prevent unit overlapping and exceedingly smooth movement. Units are able to block enemies properly. Subject to future changes. Unit changes (only done for citizen soldiers, need more testing): unit balance, and various changes making tactics and micromanagement possible. AI: I have made a bot called Catilina based on Petra bot, and tested it with @Yekaterina. Currently the medium difficulty is roughly equal to a 1300-1400 level human player. Note that this bot is intended for testing rather than competing against human players at the moment. We recommend 'balanced' behaviour, and 200-300 pop, very low to medium resource, small to medium map size settings. It should work on any map not divided by water regions (e.g. mainland). If you want to see two Catilina bots fighting against each other, we recommend small Corinthian Isthmus map, since they prefer to head to the opponent's base rather than fighting against its army directly on other maps. Techs: Merged damage techs and added movement speed techs to encourage combined army. ========================================================================================================= 0.0.4 Preview (not yet available on github) This update will focus on champions and clean up some existing civ features that will not be presented in Res Gestae, paving the way for civ differentiation in the next update. It will also include other gameplay changes and hotfixes. Hotfixes: Fixed some incorrect unit stats. Fixed champion movement issue (resulted by low returning rate+pushing mechanic+pathfinder parameters, reported by various players) Civ Features: Removed some existing civ features. Buildings: Towers have bonus against cavalry. (Towers had little use against early cav rush and they usually considered as not worthy in early game. This update makes towers the most effective way to defend against cav rush - an investment that can actually keep your base safe. And it won't a proper siege much harder. So consequently, if the rushing side finds the opponent's base well defended by towers, it would be a better idea to find some hunts or rush another player instead. This helps with building a rush-boom-turtle-rush counter dynamic. Units: This updates contains the initial changes for champions: based on my mathematical model fr production and battle strength, champions, particularly melee infantry types, have much better cost efficiency than in vanilla a25. This makes waiting for phase three a good choice alongside attacking with citizen soldiers and rams in phase two. Different civs have genuinely different champions, with their pros and cons. Further balancing adjustments will be needed. Mercenaries: they are based on a23 mercenaries now - good at fighting; bad at gathering; expensive but fast to train Siege units stats changes AI: various minor AI changes ========================================================================================================= 0.0.3 The first major update of Res Gestae: AI difficulties: There are nine AI difficulty levels now - I found the highest one most entertaining for myself. Note that the rating intervals are merely guidelines, which do not reflect your level in vanilla multiplayer. AI: Various improvements including use of towers, change of combat behaviours, adjustments for gameplay changes, basic support for tiny map and more. Diversification: Catilina has different behaviours in each match - it might rush or choose to attack at different time. Gameplay changes: Arsenal and rams are available for all factions in Phase 2, which encourages more diversified strategies other than booming and attacking when pop cap is reached. Consequently, phase 3 will give players much better options to boost economy and army strength (in this version some p3 techs already have reduced cost). Champions will be addressed together with civ differentiation in future updates. Techs: reduced cost for many p3 techs and phase3 itself. Units: slightly changed gathering rates. Rams have significantly more health and lower damage - siege will last longer and winning battles is much more important for both sides: attacking side should not overspam rams; defending side should not try to 'pick out' rams before defeating attacker's army. Buildings: economic buildings and palisades are much easier to destroy. Lower hack resistance for almost all buildings. Stones towers deal more damage and cost more resources - it should be a good option to garrison towers when you are under attack. Slightly better vision for all towers. Other changes: slightly changed formations. 'Random' draws each civ with equal probability now. ========================================================================================================= Planned features that will NOT be implemented in recent updates: (due to compatibility issues or amount of work required) AI border contact management - we do not recommend having AI closer than 1v1 small mainland (e.g. 1v1 on any tiny map, or 2v2 on any small map) Naval overhaul and AI naval management UnitAI changes - compatibility issues with current release and svn AI defence overhaul - Catilina is using the defence modules of Petra, which should be substantially reworked. Only minor improvements will be implemented in recent updates. ========================================================================================================== MOD IS NOW PLAYABLE. COMPATIBLE WITH ALPHA 25. https://github.com/Nagasushi2021/Res_Gestae Still a work in progress. Please report bugs and suggest balancing and gameplay ideas

Perhaps we can add infantry crossbowmen (non-champions) and gastraphetes operators. They will be good counters against cavalry archers and camels, who are quite unopposed. Sometimes, Iberian players spam houses in front of their walls to waste the time of enemy rams, meanwhile, there were many discussions about palisades interfering with the siege weapons' pathfinder. These inspired a new unit: siege engineers, who can walk through gaps in enemy structures to their vital buildings, then construct a siege weapon in situ, assuming they are not killed by the enemy while walking and building. I think this unit would be a fun addition to the game. Infantry axeman certainly sounds interesting, although I am not sure historically which civs actually used such an unit, except for Kushites and Bactrians. Nevertheless, they can be an interesting addition to the Millenium AD mod.

Greetings! I have some replays to share: some of these games are the ones that I played myself, and others are the ones I watched. Feel free to share your replays below as well! This one is an interesting match between vinme and bml304: metadata.jsoncommands.txt