real_tabasco_sauce

Everything you have written qualifies as "antics" XD 1. This entire discussion. And the other topic you made. 2. You are super toxic in the lobby too, always hating on nubs. 3. u get extremely angry when you lose, profanity and all. 4. You blame everything on other people, and act like you are perfect: "Oh no it couldn't be me, it couldn't be that I messed up. It has to be someone else's fault" long story short: "im not ranting!!!!!!" *proceeds to rant

<< omg stop topic spam plz >> Also dancing is not cheating: The game has parameters that define the movement of units. The player can move as much as they want, resulting in micro (considered good) and dancing (considered bad). However, the line between these two can be grey. For example, would you consider retreating a unit in a zig zag pattern dancing? It is better to allow all unit movement than to try and ban specific movements. Another reason is that it doesn't really effect the game that much. It could a little in a 1v1, but all it does in a TG is make you mad lol. I believe acceleration in a26 will be the end of dancing, so you can finally be at peace .

I don't think cav should be 2 pop. Cav spam can be annoying when players use them as a replacement for infantry, just because they are stronger and do more damage. I would prefer the mobility being the primary advantage over infantry, so a damage nerf should be fine here. One issue (which I have attempted to address) is that cavalry can see much farther than infantry, which makes them much harder to track down and kill. I think the best approach is to fix gameplay so that cavalry counters are more effective.

why not just rejoin? U can rejoin right after getting kicked, hosts use it as a warning sometimes.

Any more voters want to cast their vote? @wowgetoffyourcellphone, maybe @borg-, other balancers too.

Dancing is not cheating. The timing of the ddos here does sound super suspicious.

when would players be interested in a large release candidate test? I think the best chance is some time this coming weekend. A few 4v4s and 1v1s should be enough to get a better idea of how strong certain changes are: things to try: han civ, with new changes persia changes, weapon switching immortals fanatic rushes (especially in 1v1s)

unification first IMO

there are plenty of better ways to improve performance, without making AOE4 homing missiles. Here's an easy one: increase the repeat time of all soldiers. Now archers only shoot every 1.5 seconds for example, meaning half the range queries are needed. this would be good in addition. Would it be OK in this case to lower projectile speed? Or would this also have negative consequences for performance?

why do you think this changes APM at all. The actions taken are the same. Take for example some cavalry skirmishers encounter spearcav on a head-on collision course. In both 80 meter and 92 meter ranges (even 200 meters if you like), the player will retreat the skirmishers REGARDLESS of when they see each other. That is one "action" if they see each other with one second until collision or four, the actions involved are identical. This patch will not impact the micro required to use cavalry, only the vision range. it will change some things: @Gurken Khan said it will take longer to scout the map, i agree. More actions are needed to scout the map, but the rate is the same. primarily: one must now be a little more careful using cavalry because there is less warning before you encounter spearmen for example. (note that this does not change the "micro" required, as I explained above). also, do not think I want 40 meter vision range. My original patch listed 75 meters, but I kept it at 80 so that less people would shoot it down.

@alre what happened to this nice attitude? you are now vehemently against the proposal.

ok but how does this patch change micro?? its the same actions per minute. If anything it makes infantry better, not cavalry. So it is noob friendly. Noobs might not know why they cannot stop cavalry, why they lose so much. Its because the cavalry see their spearmen long before the spearmen see cavalry. This is not making the learning curve steeper: it is balancing infantry and cavalry vision. A very small change to gameplay. Stop making it something it is not.

? no I said this because you literally said:

as it should be. They are fast, you should be careful not to wander into spearmen. Again, this will not increase the micro required to use cavalry in any way: you still do the same number of clicks!!! The only difference is that you have to react a little bit faster. so you like the lighthouse cavalry? I just feel like once you have a cav army, especially with champions, you basically have fog of war turned off XD. There's no question about where your enemies are.

I still can't find one good reason to not reduce vision of cavalry. here are some reasons to equalize infantry and cavalry vision to 80: general infantry/cavalry balance spearmen more likely to successfully reach or trap cavalry slightly easier for spearcav to chase down ranged cavalry. level playing field for archers versus archer cav (for example in a camel rush) champion cavalry no longer see 96 meters (massive compared to 80, see my pics), slightly easier to defeat. scout towers more relevant overall more surprising and exciting gameplay.

@alre was discussing micro for fighting with horse archers. taking longer, not more micro. Your actions per minute will be the same, whether you queue more waypoints, or scout manually. Most players would not even consider scouting micro to be honest. Micro is usually just handling the details of a fight: retreating weak soldiers to safety, sniping key enemy soldiers, using formations, even dancing if you are toxic lol.

XD. Please, no homing missiles.

a couple of meters, assuming the earth is a perfect sphere. For all practical purposes, this is a negligible difference. I am not reducing all vision range, just cavalry. No this is not a bottomless pit, because I reduced it to 80 meters and no more. I prefer something less for all soldiers, but this is another discussion. Are you just opposed to changing the game? ? no it doesn't mean more micro. It means the same micro in less time. shall I make a poll?

you make a point, thank you. I would honestly say they are more unfriendly to the recipient of a camel/horse archer rush: noobs have an extremely difficult time dealing with camel rushes, often because their own ranged units cannot hit the camels (because the camels see the counter well in advance) That being said, I don't expect this to increase the micro required. After all, the main micro technique is to retreat vulnerable horse archers as needed (and maybe to snipe enemy ranged units). <- these techniques are limited by attack range more so than vision range. the lowered vision range will only change the time you have to respond to a threat.

12 to 16 meters longer to be exact, competing with scout towers and catapults. I would also like to see a reason not to change it.

you are the only one in opposition to my knowledge.

exactly, the same goes for infantry. I bet you would like to escape infantry spearmen, but its very very easy since champion cavalry see farther than an outpost. you literally disagree everywhere, but I still have not seen why

I said it is a contributor. Obviously there are many other reasons. basically cavalry can see their main counter (spearmen) long before the spearmen can see them. Another example: camel rushes are easier to pull off because camels can see infantry archers before infantry archers can see camels.

I don't think enemy health bars should be hidden. It is nice to know what units you have already damaged and its not very friendly to beginners to not see the health bars. I am on board with everything else tho.

I mentioned this elsewhere but I think it deserves it's own topic. Cavalry can see more than infantry in the game because they are sitting on a horse. I understand they are on a vantage point, but 12 meters more is very excessive. Also, vision range is impeded by the same things regardless of height. (hills trees etc) Fog of war represents these obstructions and provides excitement to gameplay. Even if it were realistic (which it really isn't) I think it is problematic for gameplay that cavalry can see more than infantry, because these units are already difficult to kill with their infantry counter, spearmen. lets do some comparisons 1. cavalry versus infantry (citizen soldiers) 92 meters vs 80 meters. this is a substantial difference (12 meters) especially because the area is much larger with increasing radii. 2. champion cavalry versus champion spearmen 96 meters vs 80 meters *notice that champion cav get an additional 4 meters while champion infantry do not get additional vision. 3. Champion cav versus outpost the outpost is unupgraded by the way. I think it is ridiculous that cavalry can see so far to be honest. At best, it is inconsistency, and at worst, it is a serious balancing issue between infantry and cavalry. When people complain that late game cavalry death balls are invincible, this is likely a significant contributor. Luckily, I have already made a simple patch and a mod for a25 to fix this discrepancy: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4744 vision.zip These both make vision ranges for all infantry and cavalry 80 meters. Give it a try if you like.