real_tabasco_sauce

Infantry are any foot soldiers. The cavalry are reskinned to auxiliary cavalry, which have no different stats compared to regular cav. Its not really necessary IMO to have the auxiliary cavs in the structure tree, but conscript spearmen and the legionaries should be. However, this does result in a change in the number of units that appear in the GUI which is unsatisfactory to some.

@Ginnungagap we should do the Sunday games on the RC2: https://releases.wildfiregames.com/rc/

Im now less worried about regular champ cav and more worried about the variants like the cataphract and chariots. I tested the longswords and I don't think they will be OP.

moving the discussion of champ cav back here, @Atrik @chrstgtr @Feldfeld I did some testing to compare the case where standard champ spear cav are outnumbered 2 to 1 by regular CS spearmen (40 spears and 20 champ cav). Both were not upgraded and unaffected by any team or civ bonuses. The -1 hack armor change in a27 makes for a more sizeable difference than I expected, with an average of 12 spearmen surviving the battle compared to an average of 8.3 champ spearcav surviving the battle in a26+com mod. It seems the decreased hack armor allows the melee rank ups to compound faster, which effectively punishes the champ cav player the longer they stay in a bad fight.

They were not buffed significantly more than other melee units. I agree melee champ cav are out of balance, but is there widespread agreement that sword cavalry and spear cavalry are too? I can't say with any certainty that this is the case. That's why I think further balance changes should be more targeted than returning the counter to 3x. Spearmen kill melee champcav about 51% faster than in a26, but champ cav also do about 50% more damage overall. This leads to somewhat similar balance, except that in a26 melee champcav are OP because they are a nearly invincible damage sponge, while in the com mod they are OP because they are still pretty tanky but deal legitimate damage. With the hack armor change in a27 rc, spearmen kill champcav about 60% faster than they do in a26, which is 5.8% faster than in a26 + com mod. So we will see if the ~6% buff for spears is enough (which is probably wont be), and then we take the next step.

Well there was a com mod version where we had 3x counter spearmen (after melee rebalance), and while it was indeed pretty effective versus champcav, they were a little too good vs the typical swordcav or spearcav rush. I had complaints that just 1 or 2 spearmen nullified a melee cav rush even when substantially outnumbered. So, I am keen to see how the -1 hack armor change plays out and then nerf HP to 280 if necessary. Changing the counter back to 3 affects too many other units, especially when most ppl agree its just melee champcav that are really the problem.

Ok, we need to schedule a time window on Sunday where plenty of people can test. We really should do a full 4v4 so we can measure the impact of the extensive performance enhancements. My window begins at 6PM or 18:00 UTC until 2AM UTC the following day. I would just schedule other stuff around when others can join up. @Ginnungagap @MarcusAureliu#s Perhaps we can do a "Sunday PRO" TG on the a27 RC? Some gameplay items to keep an eye out for: Capture balance: units defend capture attacks proportional to their capture attack, so women do not defend buildings from capture. cavalry capture attack is decreased, yet balance may still be problematic. Champion cavalry nerf is enough? Champion variant balance: cataphract, chariot, longsword if you use windows and don't want to uninstall a26, you can follow this guide:

Something like "Hack-dealing units are particularly good against siege, garrison some to give approaching rams a surprise!" This would maybe prevent another few "battering rams are OP" posts.

We are back! It's strange to revisit this topic with the same task at hand. I'll be available 8:00 PM UTC this Saturday for some testing games. I might switch back and forth between a26 and the RC to get more players involved. link to the recent RCs: https://releases.wildfiregames.com/rc/

@Itms what commit are these RCs at on the release-a27 branch?

I've thought about it before. Its an idea with a lot of grey area. Should they block vision too? How would the implementation work to try to shoot over the walls? I'm sure it could work, but it would take a lot of figuring out, and I'm not sure if it fits with the abstraction level of the game. @Grapjas this could be something interesting to try out with your mod.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08409-6 potential for a civ/team bonus

I am most concerned about random maps. Skirmishes and scenarios are more responsible for being "pretty" imo, so if those should be reduced to ~40 maps of the upmost quality, I would be fine with it. With random maps, gameplay comes before beauty, so I'd hate to see good maps get junked because they look bad. You will notice with my very first post taking aim at river archipelago, I made a fan of this map upset. Personally, I think its better to keep these seldom-used random maps in the game unless they are truly redundant like Kerala. Well they already are in the options. With the quick-play mode, I meant to instead put a selection of the best maps into the limelight for new users to quickly get a taste of cool looking maps. Well, I'd argue not every random map needs an update. While I can only try to make maps pretty, I can definitely make them more enjoyable and balanced.

To be honest, its really not that many. The situation could be greatly improved without removal with: better organizing map categories like I tried to do ("Default" category problem), and folding 2,4,6, and 8 player versions of skirmish maps into one map. I think the redundant maps could be removed entirely, and maybe some of the niche maps like snowflake sea rocks could be a good fit for community maps. Also, we haven't touched on what is a "quality" map. I think for random maps, playability is the most important aspect, with looks being secondary. However, for skirmish maps, appearance is more important than it is in random maps. While some random maps do not look pretty, they are quite fun. I think for this reason and others, it would be just fine to have the highest quality maps be front and center to the user, like through quick play, but keep all the maps accessible in game setup and the map browser. So my issue isn't with organizing and cleaning up maps, its just with the "remove first" approach.

Right, but removing a ton of stuff, even just temporarily, is not a great approach to that. We have new civs, UI improvements, options, and graphics that all contribute to quality. I could improve at least 10 random maps by a28, probably more. If you do the same for skirmish maps, we are already close to "done". My point is it shouldn't be a big project or overhaul, but instead a continued effort to do better upkeep for maps.

afaik, running is just used for fleeing and for getting into formation. Acceleration is how quickly the unit gets to its top speed. I think the numbers are in m/s and m/s^2. i suppose you could make the speeds and accelerations realistic.

why not instead just improve the maps without removing them first? We can certainly remove truly redundant maps. If the concern is bloat and excess options confusing players, then a "quick play" option might be good with a pool of the maps and other options made more streamlined. This could be the basis for a ranked mode too.

I think we should have some sort of ranked play system with matchmaking for ratings. It should use a set map pool and a handful of other constrained settings (ie u can't make the map giant to throw off your opponent). The hold up is that it probably won't work well with a small player count.

have you had a report from someone without a rating? I wonder if ratings could not be the direct cause but one of a handful of contributing factors.

do you want info from players that haven't ever had this happen to compare? In my case, I have never had a rating with my account, so that is probably why.

well we want to make spamming accounts more difficult, but not at the expense of first time account creators. Having to register an account here to play multiplayer would probably stop lots of ppl from trying multiplayer.

I think with https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/7047 , he will at least be less able to hold hosts hostage by threatening to leave if a spec he doesn't like isn't banned.

I know it’s just I was in the middle of something else and found it funny. I’ll make an issue.

Might be the funniest buglet I have ever found: 20241216-0630-20.5597295.mp4 When promoting entities in a formation, the formation standard decides to do the pathing first then all the cav catch up once the flag is at the destination.

well I don't see what else is selected in this screenshot, but the centurion is, and it should give its aura icons to units in its influence (not including itself).