BeTe

i am not sure I undertand 2nd paragraph. Regarding 1st one: I don't think there's "best" balance. It really depends on what type of game you want. I think you can automate a lot things and still have good game. For example , (extreme) example: you have FreeCiv/Cilization or Heroes of Might and Magic 3 games - you don't have micro and APM requirement at all there, but it's still good game. It's extreme example, but you get point. Thing is, if you remove mechanical requirements, you need to add complexity elsewhere. HoMM has many resources, upgrades, location and possible decisions. FreeCiv has many tech paths, city improvements, units, etc. Mechanics doesn't help there. You need to read and learn a lot there. For 0AD, I really think we need to constantly look at AOE 2 but keep 0AD unique and not just bad copy of that game. But those fundamentals need to be taken into consideration. Also overall 0AD players skills are lower then AOE 2 - so it's good to keep that on mind and make sure it's not too APM demanding. With time, as players' skills progress, you will need to switch more towards mechanical demanding game to make sure top players are not bored.

P.S. my experience about related topic: OpenRA Red Alert (open source CnC games project) as you know has infinite queues and it never runs out. As result, we have players that queue 1000 units in queue and never check it again. I ran experimental tournament with idea to reduce this queue sizes to 5 or something and there was intense discussions. Some people said that it's retarded change and some were for that. At the end people wanted balanced solution of 50 or 100 units. Most of competitive players were FOR the change and smaller queue sizes. Unlike casuals.

@seregadushka Hi. "Fighting UI" is pretty popular discussion in RTS world. My opinion is that 1) RTS should not be played like (turn-based) strategy games (like Chess, Go, Civilization, HOMM, etc.). You still need "real-time" element. Some people prefer more clicking and some people more thinking. I'd say RTS genere is balance between the 2. Between chess and Counter strike or similar games for example. 2) For easier discussion, people mentioned BW and AOE2 (I'd add Warcraft 3) as very success ~30y old games with old mechanics that still works and a lot players play it. I'd add to discussion: there's different type of successful RTS games that automated a lot of things: Supreme Commander FAF and it's ascends Beyond All Reason and Zero-K. Even if those games are automated, they are also popular (well BAR is). But you still have clicking there, more or less. So what's catch? I think it's about switching focus of clicks. In BW/AOE most of clicking is focused on production and micro. In SupCom-type games it's switched to general macro. In PvP (player vs player) clicking in RTS is inevitable. 3) I would also add BattleAces as failed game. There's no macro and everything is automated and it failed hard. TBF, I don't say it's same as what you suggest. You will get point why I added it to discussion. 4) Regarding this automation discussions, there will always be different vision between competitive players and casuals. B/c of this, you will always have unsatisfied group of people however you balance it. So it's about authors to decide how they balance it. 5) I will add 1 more example: NBA basketball 3 pointer range. This is short history: - 1979 (Oct 12): NBA officially adopts the 3-point line, initially viewed as a "gimmick," with a 23’9” radius and 22’ in the corners. - 1994-1995 Season: The NBA shortened the distance to a uniform 22 feet around the entire basket to boost declining scoring, a change that lasted three seasons. - 1997-1998 Season: Due to higher percentages and increased usage, the NBA reverted the line back to the original 23’9” distance (22’ in corners). You can blame NBA for what they did in 1997 as artificial made obstacle. We can say "hey decrease range and make basket 2x bigger". And some people will like it I am sure, but NBA would lose a lot if doing that. My personal opinion is that 0AD is already a bit too much automated, but it's still fine. Adding more could ruin game.

From Discord: FORMAT Hey everyone, this is a 1v1 tournament where there will be 2 brackets: The Winners' Bracket and The Ladder Bracket. EVERY PLAYER in either bracket will have a match EVERY WEEKEND for 4 weekends in a row. Then by the end of the tournament, everyone will have their final rank on where they finished in the tournament. There will be a live update for matches on the Google Sheet bracket that will be posted in the "bracket-and-round-discussion" channel. The top 16 seeds will begin in The Winners' Bracket. Since there are 22 players, the tournament will start by having the bottom 12 seeds compete for the 6 lowest seeds in The Winners' Bracket. The Winners' Bracket: If you continue to win, you will remain in The Winners' Bracket. The Ladder Bracket: As soon as you lose, the following week you will join The Ladder Bracket. This is where most players will be after the first round. These players will compete to finish in the highest possible rank by the end of the 4th round of the tournament. RULES Matches will be best 3/5: A player can of course resign the match early if they'd like. Map Selection: Map will always be small mainland balanced temperate. Standard settings: 200 max pop for every game and starting low resources Game Verification: All games are Rated for a bit of extra game verification. At least one spectator is strongly encouraged to avoid market exploitation and any other forms of cheating. Spectating: Spectators only chat in the observer chat. If they speak in the everyone chat after a player asks that they stop, then a player can request to remove the spec before resuming the game. Scheduling and Punctuality: THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE TOURNAMENT. Matches must be scheduled promptly and between Friday-Sunday of each week. If player one is showing a lot more availability for player two and the match does not get played, player two will be DISQUALIFIED. We are NOT going to procrastinate like the last tournament. EVERYONE PLAYS A ROUND EVERY WEEKEND The Most Important Note: You must be COMMITTED, PUNCTUAL, AND RESPONSIVE in order to play in this tournament. If you cannot be, then please let SneakEP or AlexHerbert know immediately so we can remove you from the tournament. Thank you.

Dang, yet another Discord. Now I am member of Forum and 3-4 0AD Discords... Joined. This is my idea (i wrote it to Discord as well): to make series of tournaments like this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3a5TxejDc-s In SC1 it's very successful and good method to have regular competitive 1v1s, realistic ladder/ratings, connecting players, etc.

I noticed quite a few content on YT from some tournament(s) , like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E92ERGeNte0 Is that cast from this forum post tournament or it's organized somewhere else? Also - when next one?? We need to test and promote Release 28 right

I think I already wrote these, but lemme write it here too x) - Performance, especially in TGs then few spaces empty and then: - Fewer units in general, ie. less/slower units spam so you can micro a bit more (like in Starcraft, AOE, etc.) - Matchmaking - Ladder website - more 1v1/2v2 tourneys

I like this strategical discussion. It's important to clarify what "we" want before you/we do any changes. Regarding this, my opinion is that more durable and fewer units on the battlefield what makes good RTS. More micro abilities not just Attack move and few target-fire clicks... It seems 0AD is too spamy now.

Hey guys. Was there any discussion about this recently? I think that's good way to find games, to engage community, to advertise 0AD on Twitch/Youtube with some fun content, to encourage players to practice, etc. My idea would be to organize something like "0AD Summer League" which would be 4 rounds (swiss format or groups) + play-offs, 1 match peer week. And to have 3-4 such tournaments per year. Alternative would be longer league (if we can have like 20 participants and do round robin/league format), but I think this is better b/c I doubt we will get 20 signups in reasonable amount of time. Better to split in smaller tourneys so people can join each, which'd not be case with long league. Additional details: - Stream. It'd be fun if someone can stream/cast games (i'd prefer 1600 MMR or better players who will explain what's going on - I can't do it). Ideally find some popular streamer with many viewers, from AOE or whatever other game so we advertise 0AD more actively. Could be co-casted with some 0AD top player. - Prize pool. If someone is credible in the community and willing to collect money on Patreon, Ko-fi.com or similar platform. And sponsor would be awesome. - Test gameplay/balance changes. These tournaments is good way to test all balance changes. Community-mod used to hold these tourneys iirc. - Share to in-game news. Over there in the lobby. How it works, who has permissions? What do you think guys? If noone else wants, I can take organization which would include: preparation invitations/forum posts, making event on Challonge, collect replays, communication with players, etc. Other parts, I'd need help with.

Always great to watch : (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GzQPxblnxg )

Aren't you the guy who fights against CS? So Cavs aren't CS so we want to encourage people to use them instead CS, don't we??

Spoiler?! :p

Don't forget this is real-time strategy, not turn-based strategy game.

If someone is interested into how ELO (very small customization for first few games) and Glicko2 works, I made wrapper website here where you can see how rating is changing after each game: https://bete8.alwaysdata.net/rts/ora_elo.php https://bete8.alwaysdata.net/rts/ora_glicko2.php Imho, ELO is much better.

I don't think there's such video, here is Eco guide: (Tho watching ValihrAnt is also good idea, agree with Stockfish)