Search the Community
Showing results for 'spam'.
-
Training Times (Or Why the Fastest Click Wins)
chrstgtr replied to Thorfinn the Shallow Minded's topic in General Discussion
Look harder. I found this in under a minute using a targeted search. The thread doesn't discuss why most players want current speed times (probably because it was widely accepted that current train times are desirable). Actually, only one person pushes back on shorter train times. It was you. You don't give any reason for wanting longer train times other than noting that other games have longer train times. Notably, your latest reason for wanting longer train times--to reduce spam--is directly refuted by...yourself: when you say "The problem with changing training times is that it does nothing to fix the fundamental issue [with spam]." This is quick way to lose the player base. After greatly increasing the player count during COVID, the player base almost immediately decreased with a24's release and it hasn't recovered. In the face of criticism, some used your exact logic to justify a24's changes. It's obviously a failed strategy. Purposely "ruining" 0ad would be a disaster -
Training Times (Or Why the Fastest Click Wins)
chrstgtr replied to Thorfinn the Shallow Minded's topic in General Discussion
Your small sample size is very unrepresentative of the current meta. Vali is so much better than the vast majority of people that his play style is very different compared to how most people play, including the very best players. So all your conclusions that follow aren't valid. To be honest you haven't really explained it. Instead, you've bounced around from idea to idea and now, for the first time, seem to be complaining about some unit spam meta instead of any of the other things you've previously mentioned. I've given you reasons why longer train times failed in a24 and you keep saying some variation of "well, go figure out a way to deal with it." No wonder why you haven't address any of my concerns. Also, players hating it is a reason in itself. There are countless threads where players say that devs don't listen to players and failure is the reason why they are leaving the game, the game struggles gain a following, the game isn't better, etc. Almost every time devs come back and asks "what do you mean" or "can you give me an example, we never do that." Well, here we are again. -
Doctororgans left rated 1v1 with fullmetal when he started losing
Dunedan replied to fullmetal's topic in Gameplay Discussion
@fullmetal: please don't spam with such threads. Reporting it once in the dedicated thread is sufficient: -
Let's have a thread where we can discuss different strategies in TG and 1v1 to make our gameplay more interesting! Some interesting TG strategies that I have observed: 1. Min 11 double push. Two players boom with infantry then suddenly send all to attack the enemy border, causing them to loose huge amount of units and all wood eco. Then the two pull back if the pocket is going to help. To prepare for this, you need to make only 50 women and 4 barracks to spam out infantry so that you get a lead before min11; at the same time you must scout where the enemy woodlines and economy zones are. If the enemies are unaware, you can beat both in one go. You can also set up outposts and palisades beforehands to prevent the pocket from coming to help. 2. Siege Hail. One player makes an insane amount of ram 25~40, then the other comes with infantry for ground support. The siege spammer should garrison their eco infantry into the rams when attacking; the garrisoned units can serve as repairers. They should also research all siege related upgrades. The supporting player should ideally use more ranged inf than melee inf. Entire bases will be obliterated in minutes and the enemy will have to rebuild. If they focus on taking out rams, then they will get killed by the supporting inf. Tough choices. 3. Boltshooters + elephants. Use elephants to protect your boltshooters and do massive damage.
-
Units die too quickly: Melee units have too little armour
Deicide4u replied to Seleucids's topic in Gameplay Discussion
With all of the above in mind, what should be the focus of someone pretty new to the game? Quantity or quality? Do I spam units in the Town phase, or turtle and wait for champions? Or should I continue to spam CS even in the City phase, with some champions and a hero sprinkled in? Don't really wanna make a new thread if the answer is simple enough. -
After a quick test, I think it wouldn't be hard to create a CHEAT (Controllable Hover Entities Area Targeting) selection box targeting feature. The goal here would be to be able to use box selection while holding a hotkey to order selection to target specified enemy units. This would look like this: Select your army Hold down targeting hotkey Box select hover enemy units Then your selected units would be assigned to target all units found in the box selection. This would nicely mitigate aggressive pathing where for example : Half of your army get baited into splitting instead of attacking enemy army because a single unit happens to be behind your army Your entire army projectiles are thrown to a single enemy (overkill or hero dancing) Allow to assign ranged units to fire at back-line units, easier then with ALT hotkey Overall making micro-management funnier then having to make 300 click to avoid hero dance, yet making hero dancing still very good, but just easier to counter micro it. Micromanagement will obviously still be intensive, just you remove the part of spam clicking ALT, and replace it with a better fitted feature for targeting and spreading fire. I'd like to give one more illustration of how micro-management would look like with this. When playing xbows units, if you are retreating, but at some point, turn back to fire a volley, all units will shoot at the single most closest enemy. You CANNOT be fast enough with ALT clicks to spread shots, resulting in massive overkill. With this box targeting, you could make the volley spread on more enemies units following your units. In my opinion that this would be far greater approach to have a user-controllable feature then having solutions like : randomized targeting by @real_tabasco_sauce Or autonomous re-targeting by @real_tabasco_sauce.
-
If this feature do provides an alternative to alt of shift spam clicks for targeting ranged units, it is not the only problem it solves. Alt and especially shift clicking with small selection (8 units for ex) would likely still be often more optimized. This, instead provides a solution to frustrating scenario where you need to make hundreds of clicks just to avoid catastrophic outcomes: Hero dance, is often asymmetrical micro for the player doing it, because defender needs to make tones of clicks very very fast just to avoid 0 damage dealing of your entire army. With box targeting, you can react to it with a single command instead (you might need to repeat it every few secs, but it's not as spammy). Overkills, when foes are placed in a way where your entire army will shoot at a single unit, there was no way to prevent it but making a full sniping cycle. With box targeting you can avoid this, just by hovering units you intended to shoot at, and not the single most closest enemy. Pathing, a lot of times, using attack move leads to weird army behavior where half of your units just move away the intended direction to chase a meaningless unit, like a cav, a female, a unit that just spawned out of a barrack in the back of the enemy base you are attacking.... Box Targeting allow you to define where do units need to go and fight instead. Basically all cases where you feel like your units get side-tracked for arbitrary reasons, you have a feature to avoid these situation. @ffm2 @roscany, I don't think this feature is adding complexity, to the contrary: It's a single command that solve multiple micro issues that previously required to learn to detect them, a lot of tricks to mitigate them, or responses when they occur. It also make perfect sens to use the existing "Force attack" hotkey, so it's not even adding a new one. This input is begging to be added, it's 5 line of codes in input.js (a few more for visual and audio effects)
-
I'm a bit neutral regarding the feature. It over complicates things, although it gets rid of the click-spam-sniping. I'd rather have a balance where it makes more sense to kill the melee units first rather than attacking the archers behind them. I like the other sniping actions as they are (hero including the luring part, cavalry in groups etc.) that don't involve click spam. But the balance will perpetually change with each version.
-
Nice work, @Atrik! As @chrstgtr mentioned above, this seems like a good alternative to overcome the sniping problem we've discussed in other threads. Futhermore, I think that combining this feature with the other two features @real_tabasco_sauce is working on can generate a more organic unit attacking behavior while preventing excesive click spam. This is good . Thanks for working on it. I'm looking forward to test this tonight
-
I am doing some graphics mod and there are error spams. These are false alerts spam and should be ignored by the player. How can I stop them from showing?
-
siege tower op.zip Watch Otherperson spam towers sword cavs cannot take them down
-
Hi, I would like to discuss some potential changes to champion cavalry units and their role in the game. Currently, many players dominate by spamming large amounts of spear champion cavalry in late game. It is becoming the common theme and is getting a bit monotonic. This is fine, however, it causes a few issues: Factions without champion spear cavalry suffer in late game: Athenians, Spartans, Mauryas and Britons have little defense against large numbers of spear cavalry champions. More spam and less strategy: early attacks and other creative plays always loose to one player who decides to spam large quantities of champions Monoculture army Champions should be elite, rare and cherished, not spammed en masse. I am not saying they are too OP at all; each single champion unit is not significantly stronger than an infantry unit. The issue is the numbers. My suggestion is to make champions only producible from certain buildings, for example the Imperial Academy of the Han civ, or only allow them to be porduced from fortresses. With this constraint imposed, we can turbo up their stats to even higher values so that they can be used strategically as true distinct champions and not just spammed upgraded soldiers. The late game is still a game of strategic fights and not spam. It also doesn't make sense that the same stable is training units of different classes. Elites need better environments and need longer time, so they should get their own buildings. Same applies for infantry champions. Let me know what you think
-
Hello, I would like to invite you to an unofficial discord server named 0ad enjoyers. https://discord.gg/KG2dPMPV In this server, you can discuss gameplay, ask for technical troubleshooting, voice chat with other players and talk about off topic materials. We have gathered more than 100 players of different skill levels; there will be plenty of opportunities for new friends and improving your gaming skills. There are enough voice chat channels to accommodate whole TGs on top of commentary spectators. The server is very active with the voice chat being used every day. We have also technically capable people to help you fix errors via screen sharing. All are welcome. P.S. a member (whom you may know as Geriatrix) wants some content in this server to become public, so I am posting the invite link here to make it publically available. Anyone who is interested can view his chat in the general channel, as well as how we exposed and reported his smurf accounts in a dedicated thread. I don't want to spam the forum endlessly with chatlogs that mean nothing to most people. The thread used to report Geriatrix, created by Meister_Augustus: https://discord.com/channels/1294736038933299222/1308893327961362472 And other caution (mostly players): https://discord.com/channels/1294736038933299222/1309687918129971210
-
A video demonstration of the disproportionate OPness of champion spear cav: Spearmen are intended to be counter cavalry effectively with its 3x bonus, yet the champion cavalry kills regular infantry spearman with 205 remaining health. This is disproportionately OP. Its also defeated a Persian immortal (a champion unit that has hard counter against cavalry) with 57 Hp left. Even matched against the strongest infantry spear units of 0AD, the Spartan Olympic Hoplite and Macedonian shield bearer, the cavalry unit inflicted severe injury before dying. Combined with the mobility and its affordable cost in late game, this unit is disastrously OP. Solutions: Reduce its damage to a sensible level so that it cannot kill a spearman in 5 hits. Decrease armour value Limit the spam - either only allow them to be produced from special buildings or raise their price to unaffordable levels. Give some counter units to every civ. Leif has implemented features in his Historical mod to limit the abusive spam of this unit, which is great. I think we should have some limitations in base game as well. The training champions from fortress mechanism of A23 was good.
-
Should I submit pull requests directly to gitea or phab or trac? Whats the preferred development platform right now? I would like to first adjust the AI to favour unit spam instead of small invasions and expansions. This is the standard style of the lobby and will make the AI stronger in late game. But I would also like to hear opinions from single players about big pushes Vs constant small harassments.
-
My guy has definitely not played enough naval games then lolol. Except Pandravabal, I have never seen someone use only arrow ships and win against everyone. And in Pandrav's case as well it was because he could mass produce them early before anyone could make ram ships. He would build ram ships first to destroy enemy docks,THEN spam arrow ships for dominance. I disagree with this proposal. Village phase is supposed to be the "peaceful" time when you can focus on eco for the next phase. You may include scout ships, sure, but make them unable to attack until they get to town phase. DO not include siege ships in town phase. If you do, then an argument could be made to include catas to town phase in mace civ as well.
-
Hello. I'm experiencing a compilation issue for latest 0 A.D. Git on latest Manjaro Linux stable, would like to know when a fix is projected. I tried asking on Discord but some bot called MEE6 glitched out DM'd me an unrelated spam warning and this morning my mention of the issue was removed from the server, no idea what must have happened but hopefully it's okay to post here. Here's the relevant part of the log, the complaint seems to be about something called SpiderMonkey and a module named six.moves: Building SpiderMonkey... SpiderMonkey build options: --disable-tests --disable-jemalloc --disable-js-shell --without-intl-api --enable-shared-js --disable-jitspew patching file js/src/moz.build patching file js/src/old-configure patching file python/mozbuild/mozbuild/virtualenv.py patching file third_party/python/virtualenv/virtualenv/discovery/py_info.py patching file python/mozbuild/mozbuild/action/process_define_files.py patching file python/mozbuild/mozbuild/backend/base.py patching file python/mozbuild/mozbuild/preprocessor.py patching file python/mozbuild/mozbuild/util.py patching file python/mozbuild/mozpack/files.py patching file build/moz.configure/flags.configure /archive/mircea/Games/0ad/0ad_GIT/libraries/source/spidermonkey/mozjs-91.13.1/python/mozbuild/mozbuild/configure/__init__.py:915: SyntaxWarning: invalid escape sequence '\.' RE_MODULE = re.compile("^[a-zA-Z0-9_\.]+$") Traceback (most recent call last): File "/archive/mircea/Games/0ad/0ad_GIT/libraries/source/spidermonkey/mozjs-91.13.1/build-debug/../js/src/../../configure.py", line 22, in <module> from mozbuild.configure import ( File "/archive/mircea/Games/0ad/0ad_GIT/libraries/source/spidermonkey/mozjs-91.13.1/python/mozbuild/mozbuild/configure/__init__.py", line 13, in <module> from six.moves import builtins as __builtin__ ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'six.moves' ERROR: SpiderMonkey build failed
-
I have not even attempted to turtle since the end of A24 Gauls are the ideal quick boom and push civ, then you spam champion cav with the loot.
-
Great civ, used to be my favourite. Pros: Epic boom, the fastest civ aside from Romans. Ranged cav + pikeman is a strong combo. Great champion options, instant unlock, then boosted cataphracts. Has something at every range so that you are never stuffed. Military colony allows you to gain map control without too much investment, then you have cheap CC bonus on top of it. Elephant spam with Nikator is nearly unstoppable. Has nice siege options to kill turtle players or troll with siege towers. Siege has become relevant again in A27. Cons: Your skirmishers will get sniped by Ptolemie slings in the first battle, then GG with your 0.2KD. No citizen class melee cavalry - can't really go full cav spam army unlike the other cav civs mentioned above. Champions and mercs are a bit too expensive at ~ min 15 but of course no problem if the game lasts more than 20 minutes. No slings and can't get too many archers in early game. You die against snipers.
-
Sword cav. Make 3 Cavs since the very beginning, arrive at enemy berries and woodline at minute 1:30 and they loose all. Then your cav go back to hunt, which gives you ample food supply to women spam meanwhile your enemy has no chance to counter attack. Feels like cheating. You can also boom with cav, since sword cav are good at hunting. Get a dozen cavs and send to enemy fields at min 7 then they loose all their food production
-
Civilisation choice is dependent on map, position and your strategy. If you are next to enemy, or map is small: Ptolemies, Macedonians, Spartans, Iberians If you are in pocket position: Persian, Mauryas, Kushite If you want to do cavalry spam: Persians, Gauls, Romans, Carthaginians If you want to rush someone or play aggressively: Britons, Han, Mauryas, Iberians, Ptolemies If map has low resources: Mauryas, Carthaginians
-
lag investigation thread
Stan` replied to maroder's topic in Game Development & Technical Discussion
You might just delete the animation folder (it will trigger error spam but it *should* not break. -
Lately this forum has a bigger problem with spam. Maybe a solution would be to forbid new accounts to post links? Like you can't post a link in your first 5 posts, and neither if your account is still quite young.
-
You’re missing the entire point. The point is to end the delete=capture first then delete meta. What I am describing is something totally different. It is where you purposely capture to gain a benefit. You’re still missing the point. If I am going to fight in an enemy base then it makes sense to capture a temple to heal my units and fight around that temple. Or to capture a tower. Or to capture a barrack to spam nearby troops. Those should be deleted. Strong disagree. It will either be a tech that you always want, which means it is uninteresting. Or a tech you never want, which also means it is uninteresting. It will also be regressive with better players who are able to consistently push not needing the tech. While worse players who are regularly pushed on will need the tech. So the good players have cheap gameplay while the bad players have more expensive gameplay (on top of already being bad).
- 56 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- attack vs capture
- stats
- (and 2 more)
-
Why 0 A.D. Units Prefer Buildings Over Enemies!
Atrik replied to leopard's topic in Gameplay Discussion
Sorry I don't want to ruin your alt-clicking spam amazing game-play experience.
