Jump to content

BeTe

Community Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    234

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Posts posted by BeTe

  5. Understanding attack & resistance values

    in Help & Feedback

    Posted · Edited by BeTe

    1 hour ago, alre said:

    41% of pierce damage inflicted to unit B is denied by its pierce resistance, hence, unit A needs 100/6.9 = 15 landed hits to kill unit B.

    please only mind percentage resistance, the absolute value before that is related to the exponential of the percentage resistance, and it's not really necessary to understand it, but if you are comfortable with math you can do some research on the forum and see how that works, there are other threads like this one you created. also if you want to know what's the chance of ranged attacks to hit or to miss (melee attacks always hit) you should find some answers in the forum, but that's actually quite messy and much more complicate.

    Yeah, sorry but Search function on forum doesn't help much - I already tried to find.

    But how you got 6.9 value?

    Oh, they can miss as well? Yeah, then that "dancing" technique makes sense. I could put cavalry in front and order to go left-right? Or better let them fight?

    IDK man.... I am trying to understand what units to build to counter opponent.  I think that 5-10% more efficient fight is big deal in that big fights against equal or better opponent. It's hard to catch everything on Forum so I am trying to analyze replays and compare units.

    • Like 1

  6. Understanding attack & resistance values

    in Help & Feedback

    Posted

    Hello!

    If we have fight like this:

    Unit A: attack: 10 pierce, interval: 1 sec
    Unit B: resistance: 5.0 pierce (41%), health 100

    What that means, how many seconds needs unit A to kill unit B? And what "41%" means? 

    And comparing to that what about

    Unit C: resistance: 1.0 pierce (10%)

    Is Unit C 5x weaker than Unit B? Or 5 - 1 = 4

    • Like 1

  17. Suggestion - Reset all ratings and change the system

    in Help & Feedback

    Posted

    6 minutes ago, seeh said:

    BTW looking into money-system discussions i found the term Negative interest rate economy. it remembers me to real skills. if i don't train i loose my skills.
    "Negative interest rate economy ... monetary system with negative interest rates ... New money could be pumped into the economy (through open market transactions) just as it is today" ( https://sacred-economics.com/kapitel-12-eine-negativzinswirtschaft/ )

    Dude you want to kill us with inflation like global economist did to us in real life?! :D 

    Yeah, in OpenRA Ladder if you play with much better player and you lose, you will still get points. And opponent will get points as well. But both of you get so small amount of points which makes such matches pointless. That actually makes sense to me. 

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

  18. Suggestion - Reset all ratings and change the system

    in Help & Feedback

    Posted · Edited by BeTe

    1. Huh, reset? I imagine I'd lose interest to gather points in that case.

    2. Also not sure that it's "ratings nobody cares about" - isn't the recent community-mod tournament used Ratings to match opponents? Also I hope to see new tournaments organized and I guess they will use Rating to build up leagues/pairs. 

    3. Also one example from another open-source project (OpenRA Red Alert/Tiberian Dawn) - it has ratings website like this https://oraladder.net/ . It's divided in "This Period" and "All time" ratings with record to games. You can even watch replays. :)

    4. One of parameters to seed leagues in OpenRA RAGL tournament is using Ladder ratings as well. So if you succeed to find opponent you could get into top league(s) in 1st season I think. Otherwise you start from the lowest league.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  19. What mistakes I did? Feedback on my game...

    in Help & Feedback

    Posted

    On 19/10/2022 at 6:20 PM, alre said:

    this was close, good game.

    you move your army way too much, when you see advantage always engage, don't disengage until you go under. why moving back all your army to join an incoming hero? if you have already engaged, just keep fighting while your hero comes, if you want to wait the hero, do so before you attack.

    if you had more barracks you could have built back your army faster, and win.

    get the baskets technology, especially if you build that few dropsites.

    when you start a big attack, call in all your men, all of them, including those on mines ecc, more is always going to be better.

    Thanks.

    Now I checked replay again - I should have continue first 2 fights. But problem for me estimating of army size and strength. Should be better with time.

  21. Should we go towards less units on screen (but keep similar gameplay)?

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Dakara said:

    I'm not always right of course, but I think beginners are attracted to big armies and fun stuff like elephants.

    You are right, because spam = big apm = not fun // /but I don't think there is a need for a big apm in 0AD compared to other rts.

    Wait what.... more spam = more APM. You need more APM in 0AD than SC2 or AOE2? What I am missing here... :)   

    Btw, no need to be right, we are discussing only. I am never right. :) 

     

  22. Should we go towards less units on screen (but keep similar gameplay)?

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    - I do use zoom on mouse scroll, but still...

    - What you mean "use alt to move troops back" - what is Alt doing?

    - People are actually attracted by large number of units? You mean beginners like it? If that's true, then all my posts here are senseless. :D 

    Quote

    300pop = big econony, spam more and make champion easy lol

    Why I have on mind that spam and blobs are bad RTS games? :)  

  23. Should we go towards less units on screen (but keep similar gameplay)?

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    4 minutes ago, Dakara said:

    Hello,

    I find the current situation pleasant. Having small armies of 30-50 units at the start of the game (less than 10min of play) or large armies of 100 to 160 units after 13-14 minutes of play suits me. Of course it depends on the maps and if we have been quiet for boom.
    I like having time to fight, I mean it

    In fights I like to have time to replace units, bring in reinforcements, bypass. We are far from total war but I find it nice. 0AD does much better than other rts on the duration of fights (for example AOE2 it's really boring and fast).

    To facilitate the management of your army I advise you to use the groups of units (if you do not already do it) ctrl 1 ctrl 2 etc and use shift for add unit to group.

    Of course I would like units to be slightly bigger and spaced out when moving.

     

    ---

    One could imagine a MOD 0 AD with a really different game from a military point of view. In Warcraft 3. About twenty units, quite large on the screen, a significant amount of life points. and skills for the most part for a lot of micro management in the fights but it will surely be less charming on the attractive antique aspect.

    ---

    A 0AD with battalions can be cool too, to see how it is managed.. A city phase and city development then a battle phase in the middle of the map in battalion mode.. a mod already exists?

    Thx for feedback. Yes I use Control groups but not for microing armies during fight. It's not useful for me yet as I have issue to distinguish units in that large crowds, especially between trees. :) 

    Actually I didn't suggest to change gameplay (duration of fight for example). If gameplay stay same, wouldn't it be more pleasant if you have less units to micro, easier to replace them, etc. ?

    And also

    Quote

    Of course I would like units to be slightly bigger and spaced out when moving."

    With less units, this could be achieved as well, right? Or maybe it'd not be even required to increase UI/unit size - they would be more visible I guess, right?

×
×
  • Create New...