Atrik

Haven't found anywhere why capturing buildings would be easier when lowered health. Maybe we're all fooled. Pretty sure it's not about capture regeneration too. You can even read the capture regeneration stats in the capture bar tooltip with a certain mod I forgot the name and see it's unaffected, and it gets the value from the component itself.

Yes exactly. That's also what I was hinting to in my previous comment, and I was checking it and indeed : Melee eles champs : <Footprint replace=""> <Square width="4.5" depth="9.0"/> <Height>9.0</Height> </Footprint> Chariots : <Footprint replace=""> <Square width="11.0" depth="11.0"/> <Height>6.0</Height> </Footprint> Edit MB, actually Clearance wasn't used for what I though it was.

Probably just bad 'clearance' value for pathfinder, so trivial to fix. You could create an issue and attache a minimal replay on main with the bug happening that would very likely help someone to fix it.

I made a preset functionality based on autociv's "bot" for ModernGUI

Thanks but that formula is too hard to work with as it has too many parameters. The root degree I'm proposing only take 1, and produce a perfectly customizable and predictable diminishing return. We're not trying to revise capture again, just have a tool to make it less likely to instant capture certain buildings. You can already add capture resistance that seems to be subtracted from every capture attack. But that's obviously not going to help our case. Yes! No idea why it's set so low currently

Good catch, I'm suprised you could notice it from replay at x2 speed. I took the video while developing and there was a math flaw at the time. The formula I went for in the end is simpler using root degrees to also avoid any asymptote, which make it very safe if you input low values. Again, check https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8892 if you want to go into details. The new capture regeneration system reward garrisoning stronger units. Would be a shame to remove it now with this. Also still don't think putting a hard cap is any good compared to diminishing return.

I don't like it that much either, but given that we do want to nerf specifically the faster captures, maybe this could be the lesser of evils. Somewhat, we cannot fix it with current balancing tool without impacting the normal capture, so maybe introducing a new one is necessary. I've set rather safe values for the PR, that should have noticeable impact only for the worse cases.

Probably something to do per-case. Backlogging seems to be worse case to me. Maybe if the issue seems important we could add arbitrary milestones. Also I don't know if it's somewhat impolite but maybe assigning members that have skillset and bear interest in the area that the issue touches, could nudge some to pick up the issue.

Thanks to everybody who voted and participated. I think the trend was already identifiable by the vote so I went ahead and made the PR. Current key changes (might be amended by balancing members). Make some techs add capture points to associated building. Sentries add +50% to towers Professional Garrison add +100% to forts Add +500 base capture points to CC and +1000 capture point to Forts. Colonies almost unchanged. Support diminishing capture rates for CC and Forts See https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8892

Here are the results of applying a exponential decay of 1.5 above 100 capture/turn. Before : Screencast+from+2026-04-25+15-51-09.webm After: Screencast+from+2026-04-25+15-56-10.webm Maybe the current decay is too sever or the threshold too low. But here the fort with 20 champs do resist a bit longer to theses 150 legionaries as the defender would probably expect.

I agree that it introduce a technicality and that's something to avoid. But it's much less so confusing then a full hard cap on capture rate. Especially given that the regeneration would be applied afterward so a hard cap on the rate would just create a artificial point where defenses are strong enough to defend whatever. The exponential decay is, in that regard, far less likely to introduce counter-intuitive behavior. Still a technicality, but one subtle enough for players to never encounter any confusion moment even if they don't know about it. I also agree that generally you want linear rates wherever you can fit them, instead of exponential one, because exponential effects are so hard for humans to comprehend. But here "exponential decay" doesn't result in a "exponential" visible effect. Instead it aims at making capture rates more intuitive by making the faster captures actually slower, therefore likely more intuitive for the defender, and barely less intuitive, for the attacker.

In any case, I would PR for what this poll gets us. There haven't been any reason given for the poll proposals to be rendered invalid. The result of 1. would make capturing more difficult then my own taste but whatever...

Every turn, a structure losing over 200 pts would resist better to the remaining capture pts it is meant to lose. This would be clearly aiming at making capturing faster less then a certain amount of time, much harder, without making any changes to normal capture difficulty. In other words, nerf fast capturing, without impacting at all normal capturing. And without introducing a complicated technicality players would need to be aware of. Already indirectly the case, since capture speed is increased by how much a structure has lowered hp.

Glad you're not thinking +1000 capture points isn't too much. We can go over some calculations for the CC that has a base of 2500 pts, we are increasing it to 3500. So a 40% buff. Without accounting for any regeneration, a 5 second capture would be increased by 2 second or 10 turns. In comparison the existing buff you provided of +25pts/sec would provide on the same scenario ~125 pts. So a 5% buff. On the same scenario this would provide 0.25sec so about 1 turn. So this +1000 pts addition is 10x more effective on fast capture scenarios then regeneration, and the break even point happens after 40sec. A minimum of +2 sec in worse case still gives a bit more room for the defender to react. I see a lot of ideas. But most of them increase the difficulty of capturing across all scenarios. Ideally, we would mostly impact the "worse" scenarios where capture happens just too fast. A suggestion that I'll be willing to implement is to have diminishing effectiveness of capturing over a certain rate. For example, if you are capturing a CC with a total of 500 pts per sec (~125 Romans with Marian reform), the CC lose the first 200 pts normally, but the last 300 pts strength are nerfed by exponential decay. Seems like a solution that could makes minimal changes, introduce little new technicalities and impact precisely the "worse" cases. Basically you could define in the template that capturing faster then Xsecs get exponentially harder.

There are quite a few ways to do this but ideally first fix the limitations that this behavior tries to compensate for.. +8 is generally elevation bonus to range, aka the height of the turret itself. If you look into the selection tooltip it will show you total elevation bonus, which include how high on terrain the tower is (on a hill for example), however I found out recently that this wasn't correctly applied (see proposed fix for it). With arrow shooter tech it become 60base +8tech +9elevation total bonus (IIRC vanilla show them merged so +17). Stone towers also have higher base elevation bonus..