Atrik

Ranged cavalry are already within that range (x1.3-x1.6 of inf equivalent) melee cavalry have more and I feel it is smart gameplay-wise as melee cav intuitively can be used to: engage backlines be able to counter ranged cavs raid with comparable effectiveness as skirmisher cavs. All 3 scenarios require melee cavalry to have this additional speed.

As you can see from this thread, a consensus will never happen as for the solutions @real_tabasco_sauce makes the all the balancing PRs that get approved by the team atm. So rly it's almost about convincing him. With current production stats (cost, prod time..) more durable units actually makes the game feel more spamy. This because there are much more situation where both sides can sustain sending troops on the front-line, replacing dying units by new one for a long while. Since melee re-balance, this happens more rarely, as battles tend to play out slightly faster. I'll maintain that it did have a positive impact on the gameplay, also because it put less importance on sniping making other things matter more.

Because after melee re-balance, melees were killing other melees faster. For spear inf vs cav, this is even more visible because of this damage multiplier. But note : The melee re-balance didn't change relative strengths* of inf spears vs cavs, it just made fights happens faster So the following reduction of inf counter was a net nerf, which tipped off the balance in favor of melee cav * However in army with mixed compositions, inf spears became more impactful as they were before since the % of dps dealt by them was increased. Now that we identified the above, we can discuss if units dying faster is desirable, and if not, how to mitigate it without inadvertently breaking unit balance. About that my take on this is that it's not bad to have faster paced slaughters when a player miss-micro cavalry, as cavalry are already pretty hard to catch: It seems preferable to keep cavalry stats and mobility high but not too fail safe Then the opposite : make cavalry more normalized with infantry (slower movement, lower stats...)

Basically I think what would be nice is to have cavs used for their mobility, and not a unit that will always be the best suited in all situations as main core troop. To keep melee cav skirmishing still possible they need to have mobility, but being less effective then infantry to fight as front-lines. Restoring x2 spear cav vs cav would also make them a good choice when needing to counter ranged cavs. Strong counters is a easy way to make units more balanced overall because one player can... counter... any unit "abused" by it's opponent.

It's x3 from existing x2.5. x3 inf polearms vs cav and x2 spear cav vs cavs were the a26 values and cavs, especially champ cavs, where still op, just not as much as now.

Finely a hero that will nerf champ cavs?

There is still at least 2 different bug with formations that I haven't been able to have clear way to reproduce yet too. 1. is units acquiring random targets when pressing Halt in formation, ex: a building even if clearly there are units nearby, or attack units far away. (happens when there are a lot of entity around so i guess it's because of some optimization stuff) 2. units sometimes freeze/dance salsa endlessly in formation. Else wise, formation are already very very useful without bonus already, for unit placement, and to fight efficiently. I know some will consider bug too but it's actually nice that units can cluster up while in formation.

Since that happened this WE I looked into it, and got a grasp of the problem. The prices are currently driven by the number of transactions and not the volumes they generate. So one can drive the price of a resource then benefit from large transactions, therefor overall generating resources. Currently the formula multiply some constants to sold amount (which is equivalent to number of transactions, as sold amounts are fix), if you change it to bought amount, large transaction affect the price more, and generating resources from this 'Pump and Dump' no longer works => The only way to have barter efficiency over 100% will now be if ANOTHER player oversold a resource, and the amount you can generate is now proportional to the amount he lost. Which is very likely the behavior intended in the first place.

There is a player who does this from min 15 onward (systematically), and it's not even me @TrashyOtherperson.

Thanks , but it's a sketch/invitation to make a complete map of all unit relationship. As said, primarily to give some kind of framework to unit balancing but it could also be useful for curious people learning the game.

The consequences of increasing range from 4 to 7m for champ cav are multiples, one is that they do reduce heavily loses when engaging them in a frontline. That does explain why even if you make counter units, you won't necessarily benefit from their already mediocre counter dps. I felt like it was in important consideration when thinking about counters.

There are no counters to Sele/Pers champion cavalry spears (but you having more champ spear cav then your opponent). Even if you had spartiate or any champion infantry polearms. They have extra range (7m) so if your enemy fight with them in formation with some melee infantry, now the champs fight behind the infantry (who have 4m range), therefor your champ spears aren't counters. Tested it against borg in tg recently even him can't do anything.

I like other things in historical, but the slower cav speed there did make me realize that it is a exciting part of playing cavalry. Trying to get the most out of the mobility seems pretty normal. I'm not sure it will be well received by most players to reduce cav speed. Making counter damage actually punishing is probably all that's needed, and what will make the game more interesting. You shouldn't be able just rely on having a big number of champ cavs and bump into any army. As they have mobility and strength, they need a weakness, and that weakness should be being mediocre at holding a front-line against inf spears. Suggestion : restore old counter multiplier values (x3 inf spear vs cav and x2 spear cav vs cav).

I would prefer forts not to have a too a central role in 0ad. I actually like having the choice of not building any to go aggressive vs building it if I plan to defend. Putting units trainable in the forts reinforce the need to just build it whatever, and therefor you play a bit more every game with the same build. Regarding balance, I think a framework for balancing should be worked on. It would be interesting to make relation graphs to have clear views on what are each unit role. Below some example with some existing relationship between units in 0AD (A27 stats, they rounded but they are actually real). Power is dps * hp (after converting armor to hp equivalent, so it does take into account armor, thoughts if hack and pierce armor value are different, a decent mitigation is to use the average of the two), so for jav above, it doesn't account for the accuracy gains.

From https://mod.io/g/0ad/m/shiny, a few small changes were required to make this mod work on released a27. I've ported the endgame screens, added some parts to ModernGUI. Would be too bad to let this artwork vanish in archives. All credits to @maroder obviously.

From your video, we can see that that javs are wasting time bumping into each others, while slingers continuously attack. If you make the same test with both groups locked in formation, the outcome should be favorable to javs (because formation allow units the almost ignore hitboxs of other units in their formation, therefor no more bumping).

There is a warning iirc that suggest to new players to start with Petra "sandbox" before "very easy".

Someone needs to make a PR. Meanwhile: standalone mod to get this tooltip : garrisonedInfoTooltip.zip Already in Moderngui too.

Why not? The data is available you just need to display it.

Interesting work. However you are starting to edit areas already modded in ModernGUI (its lobby page also adds buttons, including 'option') and therefor it is breaking the historical compatibility/complementarity of the two mods.

It's a powerful tech/unit. But it's hard to adapt eco to it as you are now forced to send any new recruit into battle. Also it's competing with other metal hungry options, even more powerful like champs...

Use "call to arm" when bringing CS to fights.

This wouldn't apply to the case above, knight, that doesn't try to hide quickstart mod. He even often host, so it's not really hidden that he use quickstart. However using this detectors in hosts that doesn't have rule against this mod isn't going to make the game more enjoyable for anyone. Worse case if you didn't know he use this mod, he have a headstart of 7 resources* that's not worth even mentioning. I already had a discussion with @real_tabasco_sauce over why quickstart is such a good mod for game enjoyably however, I could write my points down if ever someone is interested. *from my own testing, without mp lag. Probably with lags it's even less, feel free to try it yourself.

I'll be glad to explain why I do it, and give some general build order ideas! I. Cheap/fast economy! Females as much for resource efficient woodcutters then CS and they train a little faster. They don't cost resources (wood) that you can invest elsewhere. Theses reasons are obvious, and are why most players will start the game making females for the first minutes. At some point, most players switch producing CS instead of females, because they will have enough/excess wood! And I don't! Won't I get too much wood? My first military buildings are very rarely to produce woodcutters. They are either : Stables that can produce cavs to hunt (hunting gather a very good boost to your eco) and harass. The extra good thing is that cavs consume lot of food so they will eat up their own fast food production, and when it's your 1rst production building, it happens also when food is cheap from berries gathering. Barracks to produce minerals gatherers only. In that case, some civilizations are better then others to consume minerals, but a lot of them can consume metal very fast in p2 (on mercs mostly, like ptol, mace, athen, carth, kushs...). Even for civ that don't have mercs, gathering minerals only with CS can help you advance to phase 3 fast, then consume minerals with upgrades and p3 stuff. In Team Games, you often have to think about which players will be in trouble, and which ones will have to be winning over nearby opponent ASAP in order to win the game. therefor going for some cav harassing, or early mercenaries attack provides a initiative advantage. As well, you can help allies with resources. Because of this, swift/cheap economy feels like so much likely to provides you the opportunities to maximize your game impact. II. Resilience to rush? So now, you probably think that the drawback is that you can be so much more easily rushed. but remember, most players also make females until they have 60, you just keep on producing them a little longer. Consider it that way : this create a growing feminization gap between you and an opponent often from minute 6 to 11. So at minute 6-9, you don't have that much of a gap. minute 9-11, you now have so much females, that even if you opponent come and kills some, it's only him killing workers that you would be replacing/deleting yourself soon! Doomed if you rush, doomed if you don't? Of course rushes might hurt you but they need to make much more kills to be effective. 10-20 deaths is just what you would have replaced anyways. III. Late game economy management with females. Surely in late game, having 100+ females is never useful. Wrong! In late game females, (from fertility festival, or just from CC) can be a key variable to keep your economy at a great level in all circumstance. They only need to be alive a bit more then a minute to gather what they cost you, and if trained from houses, are so great to keep your population (and therefor your economy) maxed out. It's much, much better to have 200 pop with 100 females then 150 pop with only 50 obviously! If the fighting stalls, then you can always replace some females and grow your forces. IV. More interesting meta There are other topics talking about this and indeed (booming=turtling), often rushing is made hard on players that have tones of infantry on multiple woodlines, all around their base. Making any rush very easy to defend. If you have woodlines full of females, then you now have the woodlines having to be defended. I feel like it does make both attacking and defending more interesting. TLDR: Females are the best economic unit.

Transparency would be a feature to display player's mods, this is something else.