real_tabasco_sauce

yeah I think 8 is too much after testing. The practicality of the switch function should not be wasted by the 8 second wait. However, instant or maybe 1 second is too quick in my opinion. 2 seconds seems perfect.

Does anyone else get this error when linking to the development page?

I can do this on Saturdays but not Sundays. Good idea, we can have games on the RC2 and latest version and chat in the same lobby (I am slowly inching towards a successful build!)

I thought they behaved normally in RC2, but I haven't seen the issue since I am not yet on the latest release.

so they don't break formation when ordered to fight?

Yes, it often seems that the melee player needs to do more micro, at least for cavalry. I wonder how a general buff for melee units would do here, or a general buff for spear units, if swords are fine at the moment. Perhaps some attack repeat time changes could be used here too (slower time for ranged maybe). An additional culprit is the 3 hack armor ranged cavalry get, although this would buff swordcav vs ranged cav. Maybe another spearcav buff is appropriate? infantry spears do 3 hack 2.5 pierce damage while spear cavalry do 4 hack 3 pierce (only .5 more for pierce). I think for balance as well as consistency across melee cav, spearcav could do 3.5 pierce damage which would be important for attacking ranged cavalry, which have 3 hack 1 pierce armor. It is acceptably balanced, perhaps because engagements are smaller usually. Although a small nerf won't change this IMHO. I like the both the stable upgrades. They distinguish early CC cavalry rushes vs more all in tactics, where you often want the upgrades. You could also reduce the upfront HP by ~ 10 HP, so that the upgrade restores it to the current un-upgraded HP.

Ok everyone! from the 4 people that responded , we will meet at 2:00pm GMT in the A26 release candidate 2 lobby. I will also be on later, if some players from the Americas don't want to wake up early how about 2:00pm GMT and 9:00pm GMT?

Only @Player of 0AD and I have added to the poll, can some others also enter your username and availability tomorrow here? https://www.when2meet.com/?16309448-e8MLS If at least 4 or 5 of us can come, we could easily recuit an additional 3 or 4 from the a25 lobby.

the amount matters. try 10 vs 10 and 50 vs 50, even 70 vs 70. the difference is that most of the spearcav have to path and find a target during which time 100 percent of the skirm cav can attack.

1v1s are needed too, particularly for things like fanatic rushes. I said we need 4v4s just because many people can use new features all at once, and testing is faster with more "hands on deck" so to speak.

i have tested them a bit, and tbh they seem balanced, but gameplay is how we will find OP stuff. we failed to test mercs adequately. I don't know if we will get a third RC, so thats why I listed extra stuff there.

To properly test for balance we will need many players (at least enough for a 4v4 or two). some things to think about while playing: thoughts on acceleration values. Han crossbows OP? Han swordcav rush OP? persia rush persia immortals OP? merc cav nerfed OK? catapults OP? A separate group can play on the latest version (SVN): try a fanatic rush, is it OP? try all in spartan rush are neodamodes spearmen OP?

I agree with these observations. Very insulting, toxic.

here is an appropriate nerf already in progress: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4744 This evens the playing field for cav some. At least it will be easier to catch them with counter units. Feel free to case your vote in the poll here too.

There can be many reasons for that message. It could be your computer's antivirus, which you might need to change for 0ad. I have noticed that certain networks might not allow you to connect to other servers. (For example my university) Sometimes, however, this error pops up once and immediately rejoining after dismissing the error has no issue.

I don't need an example of how toxic you are in the lobby. Most people I know in the lobby agree on this. As for this discussion, just look at how you make such a big deal of nothing. You have written about 1000 words on this topic alone, just chill out. <this goes for the lobby too. In any case, the bottom line is that @SaidRdz is innocent, no cheating was committed.

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?