real_tabasco_sauce

I'd say it doesn't have to be all or nothing. For instance, if we are ok with changes after the feature freeze, I could just submit the wall doubling patch for the release candidate, and further changes can be done in the community mod.

This is a touchy subject at the moment, but I have a suggestion (in addition to player mute) that might help. In the settings, one can select "only buddies" are allowed to join a game late to spectate. There could be another player status called "blocked" which both mutes the player for you in the lobby but also forbids them from joining games you host.

I would think the only difference would be players might want to put units up there more frequently, making the feature more used. The units on the walls already are stronger with more armor and vision range. I predict the only type of player that would play with more units because of this would be someone trying to build some kind of mega city, with a lot of units up in the walls. I think a flat attack range increase of 5 or 10 meters could be interesting, much more impactful for skirms which are usually not garrisoned. I would say between doubling garrison space, decreasing build time, decreasing wall turret costs, and adding a range bonus to garrisoned troops, we have a lot of options on the table for potential improvements. I will think of an appropriate and balanced combination and we could try it out in the CM.

an additional row of soldiers looks great on walls: This was just a quick test, so I only did it for the Athens long wall, but I think it would work for all the other walls too. https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4914

What do you all think? I'd say it looks like a proper garrison force. We could try this out in the community mod along with faster build time. perhaps this is off topic, as the discussion is really on AI. I will post a pic in the community mod discussion.

yeah, my point was it would be nice if they could be better used to bide precious time to gather a defensive response. Ideally, the defender can benefit from the time the attacker wasted by pathing around or having to take down the walls (ie more time for a technology to complete researching before starting to fight). I agree, they should also be a significant advantage for a defending army, but I think this should come from adding another row to turret space, rather than giving wall turrets arrows again.

This is true, but it would be nice if walls could be more useful for quick defenses, rather than exclusively for turtling (i guess palisades are used just to limit the movement of cavalry around one's base, but this is done long in advance). I think build times should be reduced for both palisades and walls. For instance, you have just scouted a large group of infantry moving to your town from rather far away. In this case, one should be able to at least put up some palisades in anticipation.

Interesting. fn didnt make a difference for me. Apparently the default is just shift, which works fine. Not sure why it was shift+backspace for me as I don't remember changing it. I probably should have realized its a modifier of another command (delete). So it makes sense that shift+delete and delete can not be used together here.

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/6703#ticket first ticket from me. I guess this is low priority, but things like this do affect the user experience.

It appears "A26" in the video is actually the development version of a27 with using openGL (according to @leopard's comment). So I would think differences between the second and third test can be attributed to the Vulkan backend and/or slight differences in the testing conditions.

Great video @leopard!

At the start, you probably don't need 5 houses. This is wood you don't need to spend yet. First get units for gathering food and wood, then make houses one by one as needed. if you can put the farmstead near berries, these are gathered much faster than farming.

@TerryF first, try "booming" with only women and soldiers gathering food and wood only. Any new units you train should also go on food and wood. The main thing is to gather the resources you need (food and wood only for the first 10 or so minutes), and immediately spend those resources to get more units gathering. Get upgrades or additional barracks if you have excess wood. If you find that you have 1000 or 2000 food or wood, it probably means you are not spending it appropriately. You should avoid having to "save up" resources for something. Don't move to get stone or metal until you need absolutely need it. You can practice by yourself without any AI once or twice, and if you can manage to get to 200 population by 15:00 minutes of game time, this is a great start.

perhaps a good way to control would be to just watch a 4v4 replay using GL and then using vulkan. Not sure if replays would be compatible tho.

I wonder if a 0ad youtuber could try posting a short 1 to 2 minute comparison. I am very curious about the potential benefits, but I will need to wait for a mac compatible release candidate. It seems some players report significant performance improvements, and some report none at all. it seems a lot of potential 0ad players are turned away from 0ad by performance issues, so perhaps this could be a popular video. @ValihrAnt @leopard @seeh @Darkcity

Ah yes, I remember this patch. In theory, the best solution would be to allow buildings to be considered visible with a smaller portion of their area in vision range. However, the most practical solution would be to increase vision range a little and decrease range a little as well.

I have had this happen too, what are the scenarios where siege can shoot farther than its vision range? (100 meters range vs 110 meters vision range) Perhaps it has to do with whether or not a large building is considered fully in view? I would think even seeing the corner of a fortress should allow the status of the building to be unveiled. Since large buildings like forts are a lot larger than 10 meters on one side, I think it would not be ideal to just increase vision range to like 140.

This is also true, they seem very bland. My main issue with it is that they are so forced as a gameplay mechanic. The developers seem to be unnecessarily messing with the classic conquest formula.

@BreakfastBurrito_007 give this a try, might be great on ur pc.

People use walls and defenses much more in team games than in 1v1s. A very common strategy especially with Iberians is for the edge player to turtle up and take the 2v1 while the player’s pocket helps the other side or goes for cav. While it is largely dependent on circumstances, this level of team play is great. the pace of the game is good, age of empires games take 30 minutes to an hour even with 1v1s. Being able to quickly play a game is a great feature. I think the biggest reason players don’t use walls is how long it takes to build them, not really the cost. You can almost never build them in time for the attack they are supposed to delay.

Nice work @vladislavbelov, thank you! Will MacOS support be ready in time for the first release candidate? Or will this take longer?

@wowgetoffyourcellphone how about this for a ramming ship implementation: Either make ram damage a function (maybe sigmoidal) of speed, or require a particular speed the boat should be going for the ram attack to be successful. In either case, the ram "charge up" is the ship's acceleration, which I think is a neat approach since we already have it in the game.

I'm just thinking a core structure to ship classes based on size would be helpful

Yes, reducing their size would be great, and I think slowing their top speed and reducing vision could allow for more strategy and could make waterways seem larger.

I'd say you put it right, it dilutes the concept. I think the player should instead use some ranged boats for sheltering melee boats from pursuing vessels. The system we are devising here should work well with a combination of ships.