real_tabasco_sauce

That’s interesting that the cases involved multiple instances.

Disconnecting is pretty common when players have spotty internet or otherwise poor connection. It could also be crashes, or restarting to fix errors.

So its 500bc to "0ad" with some fairly lenient exceptions, like Boudica.

Actually for the Germans, the biggest issue is the market. We have suffficient props to make the units look different and even unique. It’s by no means game breaking, but the current market is really too large and visually similar to the arsenal building. If you would like to work on buildings, @wowgetoffyourcellphone could point you in the right direction, although I think some difficulties arose last time it was worked on.

I don't think there is enough agreement here to move forward with the forge changes directly into a27. As I said in my previous post, I think we should make the com mod in a27 more experimental. More frequent releases with a small-ish number of ideas to test in each one, then we start with a clean slate each time. We could test a lot more ideas more quickly and get decent community involvement since the mod is very available. And we can try really big ideas that might have been too risky with the current setup.

Well, at first i had the docks, but they are quite hard to place consistently and nicely for the stronghold and river placements. At the same time there is enough wood on each starting island that getting a dock is not a problem. After I removed the docks entirely, I think it was a good decision because of pathing and because dock timing is relevant to gameplay. The docks of course are still there for "land grab" because you often want to get ships very fast in that map.

Limit of 8 centurions at the moment

Foothills, I guess, is pretty easily tested, since you can check it out in the com mod. My 3rd map is just now ready for merging: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/7225 It is an update to migration, with the previous version being renamed to "Land Grab". The big idea for the updated migration is flexibility. This style of map has produced some really awesome games in high level aoe2. With the island splitting teams and players, it is more natural to contest it. Larger islands also mean players can move to take the middle island early or focus on booming or water control and then try to take the middle to win in the long run. The map is quite balanced, with the starting woodlines having very similar total wood count, and each player has good access to fish. in the central island, resources can generate close to the shore, so ships may be used to deny resources. Lastly, the map supports 3 different placement options, which have dramatic consequences for how the map may be played.

Well, there is a topic for the roman reforms, but I'll make it brief. For historical accuracy, we cannot have extraordinarius in the post-reform roster. The reforms are meant to change the gameplay somewhat, but not completely switch the civ out for something else. Unlocking onagers, training centurions, and unlocking legionaries are certainly enough changes for one tech to accomplish. Therefore, in order to preserve other units and improve the look of the reforms tech, units should be reskinned with their post reforms counterparts. Its a way to add some cool factor and try and maintain historical accuracy without completely rearranging the gameplay.

I recognize its not ideal for one's champs to be downgraded to swords. We will find a good reskin for the extraordinarius.

Promotion is the best means for a tech to convert a unit into another unit. U can see this with the mace silver shields. In this case, since the champ swords are supposed to be unavailable after the tech for historical reasons, they convert to legionaries. however, I think for the final version of the Marian reforms, it would be better to do a reskin approach like what is done for the CS cavalry units.

Well, in general, i think the community mod has been good for a26, especially since it fixed a couple of issues with the base game such as the han farm techs not working. However, because of the division it created, I'd like to suggest a bit of a different approach for the next alpha: Each version should be a clean slate. This way each version is an opportunity to test some new ideas or balance, and the successes of one version do not become pressure on the subsequent versions to be perfectly balanced. I expect this will result in less regular use of the community mod, which means players will mainly play together on the base game, resulting in less division. This approach is also more friendly to more experimental ideas, which are currently somewhat avoided in order to avoid "ruining" the com mod. Some of my experimental ideas are an infantry balance where melee units are generally faster than ranged units, with exceptions, and the introduction of a laborer economic unit to tackle the booming = turtle topic.

Yes, to an extent. However, the situation where melee infantry units die first is still present.

Well somewhere in the gui, it’s looking for the literal name “Default” to be the default map filter. the new categories result in “Demo” being the default for both skirmish and random maps, so I tried to fix that for an hour. In doing so I mistakenly reset, losing my uncommitted changes. upon realizing what it would take to re do everything, I realized that the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. im much better off getting my 3 new maps out the door and then doing spot checks on a few high potential maps (improving wood, balance, ie sryia, Persian highlands)

Yeah trade is awkward. On most maps, it’s not worth it, but on maps where trade is good, it’s almost guaranteed that the better or faster trade wins the game. It might be good to make them a bit easier to take down if they do end up getting buffed.

What about utilizing stone cost for the forge? something like 200 wood, 50 or 100 stone. i think this could be interesting as it brings a bit more opportunity cost into the picture since mining techs, production buildings, and clicking up also cost stone. It would also make the no stone build for Gauls less strong.

Ok, it looks like I have to keep the "Default" category name because it is baked into the gui setup defaults for random maps AND skirmish maps. ^makes me want to vomit. So basically I will rename "Favorites" to "Default". Actually, because of this, it is not worth my time. I think we have a good idea of the way forward though. In the mean time, I will do some miscellaneous improvements to several maps, especially looking at wood resources. In that patch I'll delete kerala.

i did all of this for each and every map and accidentally did git reset --hard

thoughts on stronghold? Now that there are placement options that include stronghold placement in many maps, I am beginning to see this map as a worse version of ambush with stronghold placement.

Oh i meant a multiplayer favorites category, so the most balanced, "best for MP" maps. This will include maps that have good potential. Although i see that this category could be confused with user defined favorite maps, which might be a good idea. I think in addition to the categories I listed earlier, I will add "Map Experiences", or maybe call it "Novelty Maps", these include geo-realistic maps and maps like snowflake searocks and lions den, where the gamplay is centered around the map. I support removing Kerala, especially since hyrcanian shores has biomes already.

"Coast Range" players are placed between a long, crescent shaped mountain range and a long, crescent shaped coastline. The mountain range contains lots of metal and stone while the coastline has plenty of fish. The main body of the map has hunt and some scattered stone and metal, but these are small. The mountain range has lots of metal and stone, but lacks wood. The map also supports three placement options, which provide variety and support a wider range of strategies.

Hey com mod players, What do you all think of the "Foothills" map with the new improvements to the woodlines? I have a patch to add it to the regular random maps: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/7155 If there are suggestions for the map, I'd love to hear then and I can add them to the pull request.

I find that is less effective/prevalent as compared to the base game. Still however, units like the han crossbowman are much better with sniping because you avoid overkill. For instance, if more than 3 Han crossbows hit a ranged unit, each additional hit is a waste. My patch that @Atrik linked is an attempt to fix this aspect of it.

I see the point, but i'd argue that the ideal balance here is if spearmen are a resource counter to champ cav. They are champions after all. As a resource counter, they might lose with equal numbers or even outnumbering the champ cav slightly, they win decisively when resources are matched.

It’s more than just speed. CS spear inf also get destroyed when fighting head on. Maybe it would make sense to give CS spears a slight additional bonus against champ cav to prevent the use of champ cav as a meat shield against CS units a couple com mod versions back, the spearman counter was decreased from 3x to 2.5x.