Atrik

It's less prevalent thanks to the melee re-balance, but in some cases it's still very important, and will 'force' you to snipe even if you would rather not doing it, your example with hans is one, another is when enemy has pikes, or even just if you have archers. I don't think it would be possible to avoid either: 1. accepting sniping as game mechanic (I don't like it) even with workaround this would still give a big fighting efficiency boost to players sniping. 2. introducing a feature that replace alt-clicking for sniping by a less spammy one (in this case, this thread wouldn't have to exist).

I'm ofc not talking about removing the ability to make a single unit attack, but rather to add a feature to make sniping less spamy. In my opinion too much workaround are considered when any fun micro feature could just make a great fix for this spamy meta. Example of feature I suggested in another workaround tweaking by @real_tabasco_sauce:

Just fix sniping... Any game mechanic that is about clicking fast fast is not interesting, and subjected to create unbalances if anyone has 'gaming' mouses/drivers with click multipliers or anything.

I also think that champ cav shouldn't be nerfed too much, just having more viable counters is needed.

Besides the hurdle of having to find the good limit to population of allowed units, I don't think it is fun to make a limit on any unit. Champs are a great way to 'coil up' and invest some economic advantage. The problem is the lack of counter options and their efficiency against specifically: melee champ cavs spam. As I said above, even champ spears are meh... not that good of a counter. In short, investing in champ cav is too safe, because of the lack of counters and the amazing versatility of cavalry. Hence the suggestions to nerf capture rate, and increase counters.

As chrstgr said, they get slaughtered even when you have a big number's advantage. In some cases where i had a bunch of spears champs from sparta or athen (note that they require special, costly buildings to make compared to champ cav), they merly counter the champ cav. They deal x2.5 but champ cav have x2 hp (when they have the buff hp), it's just not fair counter. Spears should slaughter cavs, not the other way around. They already have mobility they can use at their advantage.

Yes exactly, when 100+ cs spears get slaughtered by cavs it's just non-sens. You would think you are playing counter and therefor, even if you can't kill the cavs (because of their mobility), they also can't just run into your spears and kill all, but that's what they do actually.

If you need a reason to nerf cavalry capture rate you could also say that it's not as convenient to raid a buildings with cavalry. As for swords vs spears, of course against infantry, swords are better. But spears are still the 'alpha' cav as they would counter other cavs, and do pretty much well against infantry in the same time.

Champ spear cav is just more available and is also the champ cav for the civilsations who have buffed champ cavs; such as Persians, Seleucid and to a lesser extent Gauls. I guess champs cavs are really just slightly too good of an option too often, because of the mobility and strength, and capture rate. The problem really is that the critical mass of a champ spam being unstoppable is reached too early. If some suggest that they should cost 2 pop, I think it would be too much of a nerf. Spears could have increased counter damage (restore it to x3 in com mod as an example, no idea why it was brought down to x2.5) and maybe cost slightly increased, like 100metal instead of 80. Also all cavs could have 50% only of the capture rate of their equivalent infantry.

If the prepare time is reset every time a unit receive a order like halt, target, or move by itself, as I I think it is, then it's the main delay during witch overshoots occurs.

I've tested for pikemen and crossbows and both overshoot cav running away. Pikes still hit in the wind and the cav far away takes the hit. Again not complaining about it, this is better then if the pike would never land a hit, but if your patch impact performance for no effects, then I don't understand the point. Maybe limit the range check for only the units that have the slowest attacking units (crossbow and pikes aren't included).

I guess it's not going to kill performances but since most players agree performances is the priority, I guess @real_tabasco_sauce should not add it to community mod. It's only making any differences for bolts and catas. For all others units, there isn't anything changed about overshooting (witch is also good for playability). Part of the overshooting was due to unit taking into account target movement and will still be added to unit range, therefor extending overall max range. This is unaffected by the patch. The other part of when unit is targeting a unit moving away and getting out of range is also, from my tests, unchanged. Only bolts and catas might interrupt their attack if the target move away early enough.

Yes! For poison just replace by "Poisoned".

No it's only poison, fire cavalry are decent units to take down buildings thanks to fire damage.

Try to add this within <Resistance><Entity> <ApplyStatus> <Burning> <Duration>0.0</Duration> <BlockChance>1</BlockChance> </Burning> </ApplyStatus>

Anyways, I think overshooting is a necessary evil to make the game playable. I though we already discussed this @real_tabasco_sauce. If the range check was done prior to the exact time where attack start to repeat, you fixed a great bug! But it's not changing overshooting, witch is also good. (Haven't checked your patch, just making assumptions based on what you write above).

Interesting but If attacks aren't interrupted when a unit get out of range, what exactly prevent overshooting?

@Emacz 's mod introduce a lot of changes that makes you play differently then with usual vanilla/com mod civs (In witch all civs can be played nearly identically). You can have a great time having to think about optimal times to attack with this new mechanics, and very often, it is leaning toward you attacking early on, because of the slow economy of Sparta as an example. You also have a lot of changes on how you balance your economy with Spartans. When successful, you might manage to get a small group of elite units capable to fight off a player that had a much larger economy then you, right before his economic dominance become a problem. On the other hand, the community mod champions in p1 are only viable on very specific map/settings. The only times I felt they would be good is on "fortress" map where you start with extra stone and metal from treasures, and have a market to buy more metal from others players selling metal for food/wood.

@Acero for now/this alpha the mod above do the job. It is safe and it only change 2 lines in gamesetup and absolutely doesn't interact, or interfere with any WFG service, and certainly not even it's rating system, as Dunedan seems to have made the assumption of. I think, in general, making an opinion built on assumptions isn't too op.

Hi @AInur, thanks for the mod. It might help players with ratings fix the rejoining game bug. Your mod is also much more compact then the one Kampot made although it's also because you don't have any presets options, but that's neat.

commands.txt @BreakfastBurrito_007 In this replay, I make continuous cavalry production p1 to p3, and continuously exert pressure using autoqueue rather then autotrain. As you can see, my eco is only slightly impacted, while a player rated 2000 is dominated and can't grow. This one is quite good, but I have plenty of others replay like this where this very technique of mine is used successfully without autotrain. As you can imagine, the difference between resizable batch production and fixed production isn't going to affect one's gameplay, nor define his chances of succeeding in a game. The 'advantage' isn't noticeable by any means other then watching how buildings handle production and conclude that it is theoretically more optimized.

You spectated enough games where I had it off, to know you lie. Give me 1 example of technique I use with autotrain that doesn't work as well with autoqueue.

I just don't understand why some would care so much for something that can only be noticed by watching production building behavior. I don't care and rather embrace inflicting myself penalties (like sending some starting resources, having the newest teammates...), obviously I don't use these features for the 'advantages' but because they make the game more interesting. This makes that debate asymmetrical since one side will argue about the (unnoticeable) advantages while some just wish to play the game without shallow clicky 'mechanics'. If a feature can automate some unrewarding actions or empower user controls, I will be interested in having them. One is free to use or not, ban in own host... These debates just get slippery when a group of people will start to spread lies, call for global ban, or insist on the topic being some kind of moral matter. Well, we already debated all of this, but now the thing is: some aren't happy with the fact all hosts don't enforce this ban. It's absolutely not a awareness problem. Nothing is done from most users to hide they use this mod's feature, I and others are often rather forthcoming, wish others would actually use it too, to make games more interesting. + you have a dedicated personnel to announce players using this mod and making them laudatory introductions : @BreakfastBurrito_007.

Imagine caring about Quickstart and making some drama about it. Still remember that game where i sent you 200 resources at start and then I crushed you. You r brain just got on the path to seek excuses for our level difference. No 7 resources gain from Quickstart is going to make any differences. I disable Quickstart in chrstgr host when i think about it. If you can't stand the 'unfair advantage' just fcking download the mod at once, it's not even form me so you can feel good about this; If you have so much fun setting the rally points fast fast at game start, then good for you, why would you jealous me then?

I don't understand what exactly you are talking about, you have rules in your hosts that I follow. And I've never insulted @chrstgtr in game/lobby for banning me from his room as @hyperion is assuming. I remember. I just asked for explanations on the reason of the ban. The only times I maybe did insult @chrstgtr it was on the forum after he was twisting my words to unreasonable extent.