real_tabasco_sauce

There's no need. Firstly, as others have said wall turrets shooting arrows was problematic because you could cram so many close together. It was also a bit of a buff for iber and just made for an annoyance even after an iberian player had been fully destroyed. We have towers for arrow shooting, and walls for blocking movement. Let walls be walls and let towers be towers. Trying to blend gameplay mechanics like this is unnecessary and distracts from the actual gameplay purpose of these structures. I'm glad wall turret arrows were removed tbh.

Is this single player, multiplayer? In TGs? How are you controlling for different variables?

My idea recently was to turn it into a repeatedly researchable tech that temporarily reveals the location/vision of one/all of your enemy heroes. So while it might not see use frequently, it still may be relevant in something like regicide.

yeah there are a few items from @Emacz's mod that fit with vanilla 0ad. We could certainly take inspiration from it and try things out. That's the beauty of the CTE approach.

no it won't disrupt work towards a potential re-release.

Ok, I have heard questions about this, so I'll answer here. We will do a community mod for a27, however there will be changes to how it works. In a26, we had issues where the mod would split the multiplayer community into mod players and non-mod players. Also, because the mod fixed a couple of bugs, development on the mod was a constrained by the requirement that each change be a clear improvement. This hampered experimentation. So the main change will be that each community mod version will be a clean slate, no changes from the last version will remain. What this means is that the mod serve the purpose of a "Community Test Environment", or CTE. Essentially, its a way for gameplay-oriented changes to be run by the community before being committed to the development version of 0ad. My hope is that we can make release turnaround fairly quick, and test a lot of ideas. Players can certainly continue to submit PRs, but I'd like to invite developers to submit their gameplay-oriented PRs too. Some stuff I hope to experiment with: capture vs destroy balance walls delete trees 3x cavalry counter added economic unit to address boom = turtle ship balance Improve Han gameplay

It might be a nice touch to enable wedge for infantry. Currently there is a wedge, but its only for cavalry iirc.

With the cavalry speed tech lumped in, skirm cav are 57% faster than skirmishers, and spear cav are 210% faster than spearmen. This basically puts them on another planet in terms of mobility. I don't think they need to be that much faster than infantry. However, by tinkering with melee infantry speed, we may alleviate some of the problem.

Well, you are using gaul champcav, which have 10% more damage than regular champcav. Also, regular CS spearmen benefit from ranking up, so involving more units would give a more realistic picture of the situation. Lastly, you should keep in mind that champ cav cost more than 3x the resources of spearmen, so it is justified that they should survive a 1 to 1 match with spearmen. Its a resource counter, but obviously there's more to the situation since we have citizen soldiers. A good player can avoid spearmen extremely well, and in that case, you still have half your economy chasing cavalry while your enemy can have 100+ units on eco. Someone with champ cav and skirm cav can almost always choose their fights, so if there are too many spearmen coming, they go to something weaker. So I think the mobility factor is heavily underrated.

Its typically off-meta in most games. 10% is pretty expected to me.

Gitea

its a typo. You can see that a27 techs are in there.

! This is really nice data here. Its still shocking how much ppl skip loom.

Coast Range and Migration are the two new ones. They are not fully naval, but hybrid maps.

random maps are also handcrafted. Just programmatically.

https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/7104 You can read up about it here. Basically, it focuses on economic flexibility (wagons and wagon encampments), infantry mobility, and crush-dealing units in each phase.

I haven’t noticed it happen yet.

I think being able to control what your ships attack has been a pretty nice improvement. this was worse in the old system for sure.

Garrison effects are pretty problematic for ships. Previously, ships subscribed to the "bigger = better" model, and 1) having a ton of ships and 2) garrisoning ships was the way to dominate the seas. But this takes an absurd amount of population, so very few players wanted to play like this as there is usually land to fight over. With garrisons affecting the strength of ships, you often could not tell how strong an enemy ship was until after it sank your ship with your handful of soldiers inside. On improvements we can make, I think moving scout ships to p1 would be good. I initially was against it, but I think its the right move. They might need to be weakened a little bit. What cost changes would be good? I heard that ships are a bit weak to land units, so we could bring up pierce armor. I don't think the techs are very complicated, but if players don't get a lot of the techs and don't get value out of the techs compared to just making additional ships, they should be streamlined.

Sorry I missed this. A "garrison" refers to a host of troops stationed at an outpost or defensive location. So the idea is you paid for some soldiers to be stationed at the fortress, which is why you get additional default arrows.

@ffm2 nice data you have here! Are these the most played civ for players that belong to the 600? Using military score by 13 minutes could highlight which civs are preferred for aggressive gameplay.

In my opinion, the Han are not put together very well. It seems like a bunch of separate and distinct mechanics that do not fit together well. I think Kush had this problem before, but its better now.

You can also withstand getting berries or hunt denied since their farms are cheaper and faster to build.

you could have the p3 tech give promotion points to just whatever class the p2 ram belongs to, as long as its unique. So the same promotion approach used by silver shields and the roman reforms. If the p2 ram is not unique, you could make a unique phase up tech like what is done for athens and persians for the promotion approach.

Ive noticed before that if you have opened the structure tree before in the same game, opening it with this method puts you back to where you left off, not on the civ you clicked. Did you look at the structure tree before this? I've also noticed sometimes that some fraction of selected units don't show health bars. I'll screenshot next time I see it and make a report.