Deicide4u

It's better to avoid the "this specific unit is good only against that other specific unit" hard counter situations. Spearmen and pikemen should be strong against cavalry in general, not just against melee champion cavalry. It's a historical fact that the best defense against horsemen was a long spear. It's also a fact that cavalry obliterated archers on open fields. Most other (semi)historical RTS games reflect these facts by giving attack bonuses or armor weaknesses. If cavalry are really a problem, a simple solution would be to improve the already existing counters.

Hey @borg-, thanks for the replays. I wanted to comment on your macro game against stockfish on Mainland. Just curious about some things, as a noob. 1) You did not research any carrying capacity upgrades. Not even Baskets. Why? Is it because of drop-off frequency? 2) Out of the entire Roman combat unit roster, you've trained basically only 2. Swordsmen and Skirmishers. Some bolters and Siege catapults later. Why no champions, not even unlocking them? 3) You've ignored all tower upgrades. Makes sense not to get them, honestly. 4) No healers whatsoever. I guess they are a junk unit, after all. 5) Maybe I've missed it, but why no Army camps? I probably have more questions, but these will do for now. Thanks again for some great games.

Just don't give them the ability to swim? We don't have to be 100% realistic.

I think the real question isn't "Why are massed Champion cavalry so broken?" The real question is: "Why did I let my opponent mass expensive Champion cavalry in total peace and quiet of his turtled-up base?"

Maybe near the lakes and ponds? But, it would be just a re-skinned chicken anyway.

I've found this old, yet interesting thread. Might be a fun (re)read.

I agree with borg, champion cavalry should remain strong. We should, however, either increase the "Unlock Champion Cavalry" tech cost (it's very cheap now), or make champions be trainable only from Fortresses (like unique units are only trainable at Castles in AoE2). And to avoid Fortress spam, increase the cost of it.

Currently? None Until recently, I've played the original StarCraft a lot. Used to play all kinds of games as I was growing up. Games I've played the most, in no particular order: - Age of Empires 2: The Age of Kings and The Conquerors expansion - Age of Mythology - Age of Wonders 2 - StarCraft 1. I've played a bit of StarCraft 2, but dropped it because of cartoony graphics. - The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind. Also a bit of Skyrim and Oblivion, but never got much done there.

For real, are people really spending so much APM to dance with their troops? I just send the cavalry to kill archers or whatever then go back to macroing.

@Noob Dude, I've proposed an improved attack move in one of the more recent threads, as something similar:

Maybe it's better to improve attack-move? Make your units prioritize other enemy units if sufficient number of units is already engaged on the nearest target. This prioritization would only activate while the units are ordered to attack move. Units on offensive and defensive stance will by default behave as they do now. Situation would be as follows: 1) Your army is approaching the enemy army on attack move command. 2) First 4-5 units see the nearest enemy and go after it. 3) Second 4-5 units see that the nearest enemy is already engaged by 5 units, so they choose a different target. 4) Repeat for the rest of your army. The number of units that will go after the nearest unit can be changed in the settings. Siege units won't have this logic, as they are primarily used to target specific buildings. We can also exempt buildings from it, as most of the time you don't want to attack buildings with your units. If the above logic proves to be good, we can change the default targeting, too.

@Outis As mentioned, try the Linux Mint XFCE edition on your old laptop. Backup all important data first onto a USB drive or external drive, then install over the Windows 7 partition (wipe everything). You really don't need it if you only use that laptop for playing 0 A.D. Don't try using Endeavour OS, it's not really for total beginners. Once you install Linux Mint, set up Flatpak and install 0 A.D. using Flatpak's repo. That will give you the latest version for cost of a little more HDD space.

I assume that by sniping, you mean focus-firing on enemy units by shift-right clicking them with your ranged units. Petra not being able to focus-fire at all is a problem. The AI should have limited ability to do so, in certain situations. Especially on higher difficulties. The usual counter to this rather basic tactic is flanking the enemy ranged units with your fast melee units. Your archers and slingers are made of tissue paper, they should die rather quickly to a moderately sized melee cavalry formation. If they don't, then it's a balancing issue. If your archers are defended by spears/pikes, I just disengage until a better position presents itself. You should never have a big advantage in my territory and if you do, then that's my fault for not fortifying my position. So, you can see how it's never that simple. This is a strategy game, there's always a way to win.

Late game Roman army is heavily armored infantry and cavalry, supported by lesser armored auxilia. This is historically correct. What isn't historically correct is that army getting slaughtered by slingers, of all things. If that's the case, maybe we should nerf slingers? I see them getting mentioned as OP all the time. I don't think slingers were OP at any point in history. David beating Goliath using a sling is a story of a miracle, not story of slings being any good as weapons.

Exactly @real_tabasco_sauce. OP, I think you are missing the point on several issues. First and foremost, a game should be easy to pick up and play. Automation tools introduce unnecessary complexity. Second, the game should be hard to master. Skilled and experienced players should be able to play better than new players. That rewards effort put into the game. Third, any game can be played casually. It's up to you how seriously you want to play. If you just want to relax, hop on a team game with all Easy AIs, for example. But, RTS game should be a game, not a job. If you want a job instead of a game, try playing Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance (in addition to StarCraft 1 that I've already recommended )

I think you'd love StarCraft. The original one, I mean. No, really. Try it. The best RTS ever, for a reason.

@Outis, Alpha 27 won't work with Windows 7 and earlier. If you have Windows 7, you're out of luck until you either upgrade or switch to a recent version of Linux.

Struggling to hold off the Roman onslaught on Isthmus of Corinth. Already out of the stone on my side. Tried to wall off, but he starts sending the rams soon after this attack. Now, getting out and controlling the middle will be quite a challenge. EDIT: Smashed him in the end. Once you get to the certain army mass, he just suicides against your army.

Strong melee, strong siege. Very strong military in the late game. No, they don't need any more buffs But if there's a bug in the formation, then it should be treated as such.

Thanks, but I've figured it out, it was alpha 14. So, Alpha 13 and below all had the simple damage - armor amount calculation.

My God, that looks and plays way better than I imagined it would.

So, this was added in Alpha 14, judging by the changelog. That's the only release mentioning exponential armor. I might try Alpha 13 once I have some time to experiment, just to see how much different it would be. Assuming it'll work on Windows 11.

@Seleucids, Alpha 23 Ken Wood was such a major release, plus there's a major "Millennium A.D" compatible version for it. What would you say is (or was) the most popular version for Single player? Also, which version introduced the % resistances? I want to try the game when it had a simpler attack/armor model.

The standard game starts with a scout. If you want to scout, you're free to use it. You can always make another cavalry unit and use it to hunt.

That's unfortunate, but still honest and straight to the point. Thanks.