real_tabasco_sauce
-
Posts
1.797 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
37
Posts posted by real_tabasco_sauce
-
-
5 hours ago, nifa said:
@real_tabasco_sauce Are there models that would only need existing textures? I could try to make a mesh then
I think all but the royal yurt and maybe the scythian version of the ovoo would need models.
I think the royal yurt could just be a more decorated version of the current yurt (house), maybe using more luxurious prop points as well.
The ovoo would be more complicated. Overall, the structure would be similar to the xiongnu one but made of stacked wood. Also, I don't know if the flags were used by the scythians like the xiongnu have on their ovoo.
And then in general, we have a problem where the yurt fabric for scythians and xiongnu looks very similar across the board like @Lion.Kanzen said. Maybe a move to use more hides or skins for one civ, maybe xiongnu, could help.
-
these look really cool.
If you need other ideas, we will also need a Scythian dock, a Scythian version of an ovoo, nomads stable, and a 'royal yurt' (other discussion):
-
1
-
-
@ShadowOfHassen I guess its a multiplayer inside joke, but ill explain. Basically this player has been regularly playing for multiple years and only plays Mauryas. he's known for funny all-in rushes and playing maury but this was the first game ever playing another civ.
-
1
-
-
A truly historic moment.
-
it could be good, although I don't like the idea of better players on a team convincing a weaker player to throw in the towel so they get more pop space.
But this is why options exist, so not a huge concern.
-
1
-
-
@Grautvornix I think the idea is more for novelty, for example, identifying a hero swordcav that took down 20 skirmishers. It could be enabled only for spectators to avoid clutter.
-
1
-
-
https://code.wildfiregames.com/D5179
@wowgetoffyourcellphone put it together.
We didn't make the rams start slower, but the fully garrisoned ram is still a little slower than melee infantry.
-
2
-
-
I just did some combat demo huge testing on svn vs a26. Not using vulcan here because of screen tearing issues I reported earlier.
a26 - 4 avg fps, lots of stutters.
svn - 25 avg fps, no stutters.
That's really great stuff to see, so well done @wraitii @vladislavbelov @phosit and more!
I noticed that the bodies really make a difference as well, which is why @nani has an option to turn off the bodies in autociv. I wonder if it would be impactful at all to make the sinking animation for the bodies much more coarse, aka updating the dead soldier less frequently. Its not like the animation needs to be ultra smooth, since ppl don't pay much attention to it.
-
2
-
-
Hm potential wonder?
-
1
-
-
On 27/03/2024 at 3:19 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
@ChronA I agree it's difficult to create a role for chariots with the current game mechanics. So without having to add a bunch of features, I'd say turn them into some kind of melee glass cannon. Kind of like Petards in AOE2, but only against units, not buildings.
I think this idea could be fun and cool, but IMO it would have to be a unique chariot unit, like the scythed chariots for pers and/or seles.
it would make a lot of sense for pers since they already have a champ cav archer anyway.
Then other chariots like the maury ones or briton ones should just inherit the chariot mixin as they currently do in svn.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, chrstgtr said:
By your own admission, the old mechanic worked fine.
I said random arrows were balanced, and I agree with that. But it was silly, boring, and resulted in a lot of unfavorable gameplay. Surely you realize we are not giving non-random arrows a fair shake here since they are not yet balanced ideally.
Diving under buildings without consequence, buildings acting like a timer for the soldiers to leave, Healer auras invalidate arrows, lack of control over arrows.
1 hour ago, chrstgtr said:It is also untrue that no one has explained why non-random arrows is bad or why random arrows is good. It is just a question of personal preference, which has clearly been expressed several times at this point by the larger community.
So the reason that non-random arrows is bad is personal preference?
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Player of 0AD said:
As I said, Athens have the big disadvantage to not have any champion cavalry, so it might be a mistake to nerf the Iphicrates hero. This civilization relies on him.
The fact that athens relies on what was the best hero in the game to be competitive is a problem.
Anyway:
https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP27779
-
2
-
-
Its been discussed, also there was a patch for this at some point.
Also, there are changes to chariot stats in a27: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D5119
Basically more hp, a little faster but slower to accelerate, more expensive.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Player of 0AD said:
Why has the targeting behavior of buildings not been changed back to the original state? 24 people voted that its a bad change, only 15 voted that it's a good change. https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/110338-polls-about-community-mod-version-266/#comment-563146
That poll offered no way forward. Its a bit more complicated than a yes or no situation.
Another poll showed players have mixed feelings about it, but it showed 3 clear issues.
The most agreed upon solution was to let building arrows be random unless targeted by the player. I tried this, but it was kind of a disaster to implement, so I went with the next most popular progressive solution which was to adjust building arrow counts.
Also, I have still not heard 1 reason from anyone why the building arrow behavior is bad that could not be explained by arrow counts. So why is the behavior itself problematic @Player of 0AD?
The fact of the matter is that building arrows were balanced under a random behavior and changing the behavior has clearly thrown off this balance. If we can restore balance, then we will be left with a new mechanic.
-
@Player of 0AD, you can't represent the rank-up change by a single statistic. Please bring in more context. like this:
43 minutes ago, Player of 0AD said:armor by 1, health by 25% and damage by 20%
43 minutes ago, Player of 0AD said:health increase might be 25%, damage 10%
If you insist on this "percent power", you should consider calculating it for the ranged units and including it in the question as a reference.
rank 3 melee units could achieve stats almost as good as champions, and this was an issue with snowballing. Also, the mod has been out for about 2 days. Save polling for later when more players have the chance to understand the changes and their effects on gameplay.
-
7 hours ago, Atrik said:
@real_tabasco_sauce Good thing you tried to make rams more maneuverable and durable.
For the defense building debuff of -50% it seems to me a ridiculous overshot. Defenses were a good way to prepare for asymmetrical battles and the only thing that was needed was to better options to break through them.
Increasing the cost and build time of sentry towers also feels sad, as often, building some early was already a sized investment. I would wish for a total revert of those changes. I rarely play defensive, but, it seems to me to decrease the 'viable' strategies and this is bad.I agree, I think I overshot for towers and forts. Maybe even for CCs too. Forts really have no reason not to be formidable when fully garrisoned, so I would probably increase their firing period from 4 to 3s.
I think with a couple adjustments and some techs for fort and tower arrow damage (or maybe phase dependent damage) it might work out pretty well.
I didn't change the sentry tower build time, and I'm still evaluating the cost increase.
-
1
-
-
on the topic of balanced maps, I made an update so the badosu-balanced-maps mod needs to be signed.
-
1
-
-
settings->community-mod
-
1
-
1
-
-
Second: no icons appear for iphicrates aura, the aura still works.
-
** first bug**
Both the melee and ranged immortals may be trained from the barracks, the price for the ranged one is mistakenly the full champion price. The correct price is the price of the melee version.
-
@hamdich I think they are instantly disliked just because of human discomfort with change. For instance, some players told me the game was broken because I made cavalry archers OP in 26.6 (I made them much weaker).
-
1
-
-
yes, and its now in the game!
Go to settings-> community-mod, and you will see the patch notes in order of release.
The 26.7 changes are shown, but I had to make a 26.8 version because of an issue
-
1
-
-
we got the new one out! Unfortunately its called 26.8 not 26.7
-
2 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
The "no" votes on #3 smh
Yeah I think the game is very much in need of a more diverse tech tree and I think this would be a great way to introduce more interesting tech combinations for different civs. I will redo a lot of these upgrades at some point to be a little bit more interesting.
Also I think ppl would be more interested in them after the naval rework, since those techs are very similar.
-
1
-
Civ: Scythians
in Delenda Est
Posted
@wowgetoffyourcellphone can a structure have both terrain hugging elements (like a wheat field) and a model? If so, the dock could just be a smallish yurt with the skeleton of a boat next to it, a fire, and a rope ladder used to slide boats into the water. The rope ladder could just behave the same way as farms so that it doesn't hover over the shore.