real_tabasco_sauce

update: reduced ele archer damage in accordance with other ranged units increased all buildings hack armor by 5 (40% less hack received, compared to melee units + 50% hack damage) siege units as well

Eliminate sniping, no. We can’t do that since it is just the user controlling units. However, the rebalance should reduce its effectiveness so that it is likely less effective than other forms of micro. Note that this depends enormously on composition and upgrades. automatically sorting by resistance would be extremely lame as this is automating a part of the game that depends on player knowledge, experience, and skill. automating this puts way too much control into a “black box”. in an ideal balance context, the advantage gained from manual targeting will be very small anyway. The benefit of automating it would be obscure for most players, and for experienced players, it would just mean watching a mathematically determined battle outcome, hands free. In battles, I want some control over the outcome this is part of the excitement of 0ad. Instead of proposing automated workarounds, let’s actually address the root of the problem: https://gitlab.com/real_tabasco_sauce/0-a-d-community-mod-unit-specific-upgrades/-/compare/main...melee_buff?from_project_id=36954588&page=2&straight=false In other words, let opportunity cost be the reason to use micro other than sniping.

I believe there was a "charge" at some point, but it was a bug XD. This might have been one of the a25 release candidates, I can't remember.

Not sure if you mean "freeze" which would mean to keep the current meta and keep sniping. What I have been saying is to just fix the actual problem, so that sniping does not win every time. (maybe only for certain special situations). Here is my solution, it will debut in the community mod since it is such a large rebalance.

Is it not obvious then to fix the actual problem, instead of making sniping automatic? It is common knowledge that having an appropriate skill gap is important for entertainment. Players want to learn and improve. This is how players enjoy games for years, not a couple of weeks. You brought up adding a completely inappropriate skill gap (singing) to explain why it is bad to have an appropriate skill gap (micro) in 0ad, which is comical. Notice I never said we should add more micro, just that we should caution ourselves on automating important parts of the game. If someone wants to automate a lot of the game on their own, I say they are welcome to, but this should be used in casual games, not super competitive ones.

Is this not where 0ad already is? Even at a high level, there are less clicks required than many RTS games. I can often, especially in the early game, take both my hands off the computer and take a bite of food. Much more automation (like auto start, auto sniping) would decrease the skill gap, which is always bad for games.

Well, my point was that it is a little strange to have the mayor be a physical unit, and the president a transient property. Not that big of a deal though, as the other concerns I raised are more important. I agree that more technologies would be nice. As you may recall, I have a good selection of "unit specific" upgrades that would fit really well into the tech tree. They just have to be play tested first in the community mod.

Well I wasn't even considering the detectability. Everything has been fine so far on an honor system, but I imagine competitive players would be very upset to lose to someone automating parts of their game. For the immediate case, I would say the bottom line is that these mods (macros too) shouldn't be allowed in rated games. In terms of game design, I would think it best to keep automation to a minimum, with unit auto-queue being the most 'automated' a feature can be. For example, the "quick start" of ProGUI is too automatic to be a feature.

I must say I personally don't like this idea of "customization." That is choosing a monument to age up with, choosing a governor or choosing one civ bonus of many. It feels like something I would expect in a single player game like skyrim or elden ring, where you progress down a tech tree using experience levels, or where you select a character at the start. I would rather these (bonuses, customizations etc) already be part of the civ to begin with as they currently are, rather than playing "build speed" ptols vs "stronger slingers" ptols. Something like the "governors" would also be conceptually in conflict with heroes. Many RTS games do this, it even seems to be a trend in (relatively) recent titles. I like that 0ad does not have this and sticks to the more interesting core strategy (building, researching, training, and fighting). In general, 1-click strategies should be avoided and I would say the effort would be more impactful if put towards new civs, rounding out existing civs, new units, and civ differentiation efforts.

This is because an Iberian unit comes close to or goes through the gate. When they open it, enemy units can come in. It can be excellent bait if you want to trap a raiding army (very funny), but most skilled players know to avoid this.

yeah I think the two seas skirmish map (with the mountain passes) would be good if made into a random map: mainland style except for the area taken by the two bodies of water, then instead of passes, just make the middle a little mountainous with various elevations and a couple cliffs. That being said, I have no idea how random map scripts work.

ideas for maps: select player spawn type for mainland and other random maps if applicable. (random group, line, stronghold) add berries to gulf of Bothnia - frozen lake. increase minimum spacing between plateaus and forests in mainland add new random map or improve existing random map to compete with mainland for multiplayer. In conjunction with @wowgetoffyourcellphone's naval rework, it would be good to add a balanced water/land random map.

Maybe not in casual play in single player. But in AOE3 for example if I am raiding the enemy and they instantly spawn 5 cannons at the cc, I consider that cheesy. I once watched a little bit of competitive aoe3 and its very lame, with commentators talking half the time about what cards each player can draw. In a way, the card deck takes a solid percent of the game's strategy away from actual gameplay (training units, raiding, eco, researching). The same goes for monument powers in AOE4. The 'strategy' in that game is largely the following: Do i pick monument A or monument B? Overall it is very inorganic, inauthentic feeling. I think it is wise to steer clear of these 'card deck' approaches, and instead add/modify technologies, units, civs, and civ bonuses for additional features.

yes, AOE4 has a lot of gameplay involving 1-time use powers or monument powers. Ie. britons have a monument that instantly heals all nearby buildings at the click of a button. AOE3 did this too, where you could regularly count on getting to use shipments of resources or units. These kinds of gameplay mechanics generally feel really gimmicky and cheap.

To be fair, I think it would be fine to add some war drums sound effects without an actual musical unit. In a large army, you don't have to actually have this unit, but the sound can still add to the ambiance. how/when to trigger the sound though might be tricky. I will say that the one musical unit we do have should get a little sound XD.

I think it's supposed to be a "tusk" attack, not trample. But the distinction doesn't matter much. It is a mix of hack and crush damage. The fire is not part of the game.

I think it’s possible if you enable cheats. But why would you want to skip all the development and economy?

AOE4 alarm bells sounding. Civs should have bonuses in the form of traits, not superpowers.

The bottom line is that people will get behind features that are impactful, fit with the scope of the game, and are fun to use. The proposal fits none of these: It makes a fairly small practical difference, not noticeable unless you are looking for it. I would expect little change to gameplay. it is outside the level of detail 0ad seeks to simulate (For example , wouldn't it seem silly to individually train horses and then put units on each one for cavalry) Lastly, I don't see this being fun at all. There is no strategy one can enact, and no real benefit to either the garrisoning player or the destroying player. I'd say it could only result in annoyance that one's units died to a building collapse. Thats not even considering the development effort, which might not be that bad: Giving buildings death damage as seen in iberian fire ships, and ensuring it only effects own units. But, compare this to a recently added feature that satisfies all three: Elephants gain a splash attack. Makes a large difference, changing the role of elephants from a siege unit to more of a versatile fighting unit. it fits the scope of 0ad perfectly, and in particular furthers the historical aspect of the game. I bet they will be very fun to use with this splash attack, since it gives eles the power the infantry fighting power they deserve. I hope you can see that in this case, the juice is not worth the squeeze.

So is vulkan the default for a27? Or is this just to ensure vulkan isn't enabled without the shaders mod?

This is funny. The idea would create more problems than gameplay features. Most people would be against it even by principle (buildings are supposed to protect those inside). Probably would be a little difficult to implement. It doesn't really fit with the level of detail of other gameplay mechanics. (the idea has too much detail, then to add an upgrade to affect something so peculiar doesnt make sense). All in all, the juice is not worth the squeeze. (and the juice tastes bad)

Side note, why do people think turtling is good? If someone has a bunch of towers and forts, just go around it, attack elsewhere, or force them to move to your army. At the worst, it's just a very annoying strategy.

Well the whole point of getting towers is that you gain a measure of defense without any population cost. I think it is important that towers, CCs and forts have default arrows so that they are important for map control. I made a patch and a community mod branch to make buildings not target randomly. What this would do is make buildings better against smaller raiding groups, and actually kill units among a large army instead of damaging them all slightly. Balance would follow of course, for example, IDK why a CC has almost as much firepower as a fort. I think forts should have more default arrows than CCs. As for ships,@wowgetoffyourcellphone is/will be working on a ship rework to make them proper units instead of using buildingAI, which I think will be a huge improvement for ships (among other things like scaling them down some). For towers, another option for decreased effectiveness with pierce armor would be to decrease their damage a little and make them ignore armor. haha never mind thats a terrible idea. I'd say just keep the damage models the same tbh, or replace the increased arrow count upgrade for increased damage upgrade (available in city?)

i'm fine with it XD. My second choice would have been agni, and looking back, I agree that Vulcan is too bland.

It seems like this would be more of an annoyance than a feature. There are better ways to prevent turtling, like changing ram hack armor, and the random targeting of building arrows. if more opportunities and strategies are of interest, then it is better to add new features (like a bunch of new upgrades) rather than complicate a perfectly sound existing feature.