Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'gameplay'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Welcome
    • Announcements / News
    • Introductions & Off-Topic Discussion
    • Help & Feedback
  • 0 A.D.
    • General Discussion
    • Gameplay Discussion
    • Game Development & Technical Discussion
    • Art Development
    • Game Modification
    • Project Governance
    • Testing

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


First Name


Last Name


Skype ID

Found 20 results

  1. Americas Ancient Empires Mod DD v 2.0(Or some better name xD) Gameplay: It is very similar to 0 A.D., with some changes listed here: A new resource water. Civilizations have different ranges for their units There is no cavalry or stable. Each culture has its own animals. The boats are classified in this way: Canoe, Median Canoe, Large Canoe. Current Civilization are: I decided to remake everything, there no added civilizations( I don't like how was the civilizations except models and textures so i will redo all the ones I already had ) Well here is the final Planed Civilizations(whit names and some incomplite general information, need investigation) i like to show this as a table but i don't find an option for this Note: School of Nobles and School of Common People/Plebeians? are available for the mexicas,tlaxcalans and toltecs also unique militar and economic tech respectively and the chinampa are available to the nahuas civilizations Mexicas(Main Bonus: 25% in trade profits and They gather food for 5% faster,Team Bonus: TODO,Unique Buildings: Skull wall defence aura?,Cultural Bonus: They can have a greater influence on the villages / communities that are under their control(more benefice)). Tlaxcalans(Main Bonus:Militar Buildings 15% more strongers in every phase starting in city phase,Team Bonus:TODO,Unique Buildings:Mountain Fortress,Cultural Bonus:TODO) Toltecs(Main Bonus:Gather rate stone is 15% faster is added 15% Gather rate in every phase starting in the villager phase ,Team Bonus: You ally can train your basic soliders from embassy ,Unique Buildings:Toltec Embassy(your ally can build),Cultural Bonus: TODO) Incas(Main Bonus:The Tambo generate metal and the buildings only cost stone, but the units cost 5% more metal ,Team Bonus:TODO,Unique Buildings:Tambo,Unshu,Pukara,Cultural Bonus:TODO) Mayas form Tikal(Main Bonus:They have 15% more cultural influence,Team Bonus:TODO,Unique Buildings:Observatory,Cultural Bonus:TODO) Mayans Kaqchikels(Main Bonus:They buildings cost -25% of stone,Team Bonus:TODO,Unique Buildings:TODO,Cultural Bonus:TODO) Pipilians(Main Bonus:Her soldiers are 15% more weak but get 15% of attack,Team Bonus:TODO,Unique Buildings: TODO,Cultural Bonus: TODO) Tupis(Main Bonus: All buildings cost wood,Team Bonus:TODO,Unique Buildings: Warhut,Cultural Bonus: TODO) Hopis(Main Bonus: Some of its buildings have double functions,Team Bonus: TODO, Unique Buildings: Pueblo,Cultural Bonus:TODO) Tarahumaras(Main Bonus: All units are 15% faster(Who needs those dirty horses?),Team Bonus: TODO,Unique Buildings: Trading Post?,Cultural Bonus: TODO) Auracanians aka Mapuches(Main Bonus: Adaptable civilization, has better defence,Team Bonus: TODO,Unique Buildings: TODO,Cultural Bonus: TODO) Villagers/Communities A neutral village you can capture the villager to get soldiers, resources and techs the resource depends of the villager, i dont complite the idea but heres the avaliable villagers Zapotecs Villager Caribeans Villager Nabajo Villager Mixtecs Villager Huastecs Villager Chichimecans Villager Muiscans Villager Moches Villager Apaches Villager I will add more Cultures: Not info for now. Maps: Here is my idea of the posible maps. Sonora Desert,Western Sierra Madre,Eastern Sierra Madre, Southern Sierra Madre,Chihuahua Desert,Paint Desert,Texas,West Ocean(Veracruz Coast),Anahuac,Yucatan Peninsula,Chiapan Jungle(Old name of Chiapas),Coast of Oxaca,Cuaxtemalan(again other old name this time from Guatemala),Orinoco,Andes Mountains,Atacama,Auracana,Patagonia,Pampas,Amazon Jungle,Antillas,Easter Island,Llanos Hiden Civilizations: They are unlocked by doing certain actions during a game which unlocks a button that allows you to become one of the civilizations that are available based on what you have done to unlock them(i dont make a spoiler :v) Soon I will make the technological trees of the main civilizations and the villages. Note 1: I hate writing in English >:( Note 2:If someone wants to help improve this design document feel free to post your suggestions, i realy needed xd
  2. Let's Fight 0 A.D. is an open-source RTS game (https://play0ad.com/) Let's Fight is a 0 A.D. gameplay balance mod for Alpha 24 (Xšayāršā) Motivation Currently the meta of Alpha 24 is skewed towards turtling via walls, towers, and forts. This problem is exacerbated by the advantage that archers, units that already have high range, have over other ranged units. This mod aims to provide gameplay that is more rewarding for aggressive players and roughly equalize the strength of civilizations to allow for a greater variety of strategies. In particular, there is an emphasis on encouraging players to utilize different strategies depending on the civilization and situation of the game. Several balance changes in this mod were based on discussions in the "Gameplay Discussion" and "Balancing Discussions" sub-forums. Installation Drag and drop the pyromod file over the 0ad start icon or open the pyromod file with pyrogenesis.exe The mod will be downloaded and you will be taken to the "Mod Selection" page (if not, then click "Settings" -> "Mod Selection") Click on the "letsfight" mod in the "Available Mods" and click "Enable" in the bottom left Click "Save Configuration" in the bottom right Click "Start Mods" in the bottom right If you have an older version, go to your local mods folder (https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/GameDataPaths) and delete all other versions of the mod before downloading a different version If you're still having trouble, see https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Modding_Guide#Howtoinstallmods Updates Thanks to the 0ad community for their feedback. Some people have had questions about the changes or wondered about the justifications. The reasoning behind each change is placed in brackets behind each bullet point. v0.2.3 Gave auras to Chandragupta Maurya and Agis III Buffs to auras of Pericles, Arakamani, and Alexander III Increase damage of melee infantry and cavalry [Thanks @borg] Decrease armor of pikeman [Thanks @borg] Increase crush damage of catapults [Thanks @maroder] Fixed fortress, civic centre, and military colony minimum distance [Thanks @Nescio] Limit of 1 fortress and 10 towers for each civic centre [Thanks @Nescio] Group armor of buildings based on economic, civic and military, and defensive classes [Thanks @Nescio] New stable technology for Britons to increase vision range of war dogs Buff to team bonus of Britons All Changes Thoughts, Comments, Suggestions? Discuss! I've tested this mod against the AI, but the best results are from real players. Try some games with other players and then let me know what changes you liked and disliked. Feel free to make other suggestions that you would like to see in this mod after testing it out. letsfight_v0.2.2.pyromod letsfight_v0.2.1.pyromod letsfight_v0.2.pyromod letsfight_v0.1.pyromod letsfight_v0.2.3.pyromod
  3. A24 was released a few weeks ago and development of A25 started with 24939. The purpose of this thread is to keep track of what patches that affect gameplay or balance are proposed or committed for the next release (A25), as this thread did for the previous (A24). Please refrain from discussing individual patches here. The correct place for that is on Phabricator ( https://code.wildfiregames.com/ ). Each entry (below) has a link to the relevant page. All open gameplay patches can also be found with https://code.wildfiregames.com/search/query/MwAW9pins9Vt/
  4. Introduction: The purpose this mod is to clearly define the role of buildings, which then leads to a (slightly) more realistic city layout. It is a follow up to this proposal: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/37294-storehouse-and-farms-rework please look there for additional reasons why I think these changes are good. So please take a look at the following building and ask yourself the following questions: Does this look like a place that you can pack full of soldiers and defend like a fortress? Does it look like a good place to store your food, stone or metal? Well, at least to me it doesn't. And this is imo one of the reasons for the gameplay balance problems. Therefore, introducing a mod, that clearly redefines the role of the basic buildings. Features: The civic center is no longer an all-purpose storehouse nor an easy to defend mini fortress. Its ability to shoot arrows has been removed and replaced by an aura, that increases the attack and armor of soldiers close to it. That is done because it is the center of your civilization, which should give the soldiers a boost of morale and it also prevents you from getting overrun in the first 5 minutes of the game. The storehouse is now the main place to store wood/metal/stone and its cost are reduced to 50 wood. Wood can still be stored in the CC to allow wood income in situations where all storehouses are destroyed. The farmstead is now the main place to store food and its cost are reduced to 50 wood. What do I hope are the benefits? A city layout that looks more realistic (e.g https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Forum) and less like someone decided to turn the center of their city into one giant farming area. Easier to understand game logic. Defensive structures are for defense, economic structures are for economy. Better ability to rush in early game Because I don't want to make two mods, there are also other changes (maybe more unrealistic) based on the following complaints I have read on the forums: Rushing is too hard defensive structures are too effective (e.g. https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/37687-lets-fight-gameplay-balance-mod/) Changes: Towers: Towers do no longer have an minimum distance between them, because that restricts player freedom (and I don't like it ) To balance that out , their ungarrisoned arrow count is reduced to 0, because it was imo not realistic that they had a default arrow count (indicating a person inside) but they did not contribute to the pop limit. To have any effect of the towers, you now either need to keep men around or let them stay inside, which should prevent an extreme overuse. The tech is removed, that adds one standard arrow to towers The tech is removed, that gives 40% more arrows per garrisoned soldier The stone tower can now garrison only 3 soldiers (same as the sentry tower) but it is still harder to capture and more resistant. Palisade related: Palisades have very weak crush damage, which means that rams and catapults are way more effective against them Women now have a torch as weapon, which allows them to burn palisades. (A few hits are enough, the palisade will continue to burn until its gone) Here is a test of how effective different unit types are at destroying palisades: test.mp4 Nice new fire effects: showacse.mp4 Here is the mod (v 0.0.3): increased-realism.zip
  5. Forum discussions are nice and all, and there is certainly no shortage of good ideas, however, what matters is how things work out in game. Because using the development version and applying patches is challenging for many, I've decided to bundle several related patches proposed for A25 as a mod for A24. Their purpose is to address the frequent complaint that defensive structures are too effective in A24 and therefore attacking is too difficult. The eight patches included here are: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2845 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2854 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3601 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3602 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3668 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3672 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3684 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3686 I sincerely believe each of them is an improvement on its own and also that they work nicely in combination with each other. Nevertheless, I'm biased by my own ideas and different people may have different opinions, of course. Hence this mod, to broaden the audience and have more people play and test. Feedback is appreciated, especially from people who've played at least several games with it. Anyway, here it is: balancing_defensive_structures.zip I've also uploaded it to mod.io to make it available via the in-game mod downloader, but I'm not sure it's working (@Itms?): https://0ad.mod.io/balancing-defensive-structures
  6. I want to hear your opinion about the following mechanic: Disable the ability to use the CC as storage, but make farms and storehouses therefore either gratis or let them have a very reduced cost. Why? It is inconsistent that you can use the CC as storage and not the fortress. Historically you would need to store resources in a fortress as well, otherwise it would be very susceptible to siege. It is generally a bit inconsistent that you would store resources in either the CC or the fortress themselves. Wouldn't the resources be better stored in a storehouse or farmstead by the CC/fortress? As mentioned somewhere else, it makes not so much sense to have your field directly in your city in front of the CC. -> See DE or the city building mod. Pros: more realistic city layout it gets easier to rush, as the fields are not in front of the CC. (At least not all of them). more interesting gameplay. You need to think about how you want to protect your fields. Cons: little bit slower game start, but as it is the same for all players it shouldn't change anything balance wise. gratis buildings are not realistic, but you could argue for a really reduced cost. In comparison to a house, a storehouse can be build much simpler/cheaper. Looking forward to hear your thoughts on that, or maybe just tell me if that has already been discussed somewhere
  7. Honest questions: How many multiplayer matches actually include the construction of Wonders? How many competitive matches? Do they have a clear gameplay purpose? Are their current effects worth building one? Do their current effects make sense? Can they be made to be more integral to the late game?
  8. Today I started creating a gameplay mod for the current (svn) development version of 0 A.D. “Empires Ascendant”. Although there are already multiple gameplay mods, and the aim of improving gameplay for the next alpha is not unique, this one has a different approach: each change has its own patch on https://code.wildfiregames.com/, to make it easier for the team to discuss, play-test, review, and implement them. Open gameplay balance patches available on phabricator (can also be found withhttps://code.wildfiregames.com/search/query/MwAW9pins9Vt/ ): D3565: Make all support units bribable. D3563: Make theater cheaper. D3528: Bring turnRate back to realism. D3523: Bring projectile speeds to realistic values. D3488: Lower unit movement speed. D3487: Unify unit vision range. D3486: Lower soldier vision range. D3466: Make wall turrets upgrade into proper towers. D3431: Increase ram damage D3418: Purge Battlefield Medicine. D3417: Balance pike again. D3416: Fix unlock shared dropsites requirement. D3407: Add food/researchtime cost to reformed_army / traditional_army. D3404: Make gather technologies less effective. D3392: New kush civ bonus. D3390: New cart market civ bonus. D3377: Enable cart basic infantry javelineer. D3341: Move some trainable animals to higher phases. D3319: Differentiate rams. D3318: Move will to fight technology from fortress to wonder. D3246: Increase advanced and elite and lower champion ranged attack damage. D2988: Replace corral technology. D2965: Separate chariot templates. D2956: Tweak ship costs and tweak merchant ships. D2900: Separate camels from cavalry templates. D2886: Introduce crossbowman templates. D2854: Introduce centre tech progression. D2845: Change phase bonuses. D2769: Add visible garrison points to wall towers. D2648: Make Caratacos and Maximus auras local. D2535: Remove pop cap civ bonuses. D2508: Prevent ships and siege engines from attacking fields. D2506: Allow building fields in neutral territory. D2477: Garrison units on short wall segments. D1400: Hero aura revision. D1351: Reduce cavalry gather rate. D904: Themistocle aura 1 modify. D497: Allow hunting aggressive and violent wild animals. D76: Revisit Vision (and Ranged Attack) ranges. Abandoned: Tagging everyone listed in the `balancing.json` credits file: @Acumen, @Alex, @Alexandermb, @Allen ROBOT, @alpha123, @arissa_nightblade, @bb_, @borg-, @Deiz, @elexis, @fatherbushido, @Feldfeld, @Freagarach, @Grugnas, @Hannibal_Barca, @historic_bruno, @LordGood, @Matei, @mimo, @Mythos_Ruler, @Nescio, @niektb, @Pureon, @quantumstate, @sanderd17, @scythetwirler, @Stan`, @temple, @ValihrAnt, @Wijitmaker, @wraitii. Please refrain from discussing individual changes in this forum thread; go to corresponding phabricator page instead (click on the links in the list above). To try out individual changes, just include the corresponding patch in your repository (e.g. `arc patch D888`; and `svn revert -R *` to remove them again). If you know of other small, up-to-date patches (only gameplay balancing, not art, maps, mechanics, etc.), feel free to propose them for inclusion in this list. Other feedback is also welcome.
  9. I think the game should have a Deathmatch mode. I'm just not sure if it should be reminiscent of the Age series Deathmatch or something "unique." I honestly think it should be mostly based on the Age series model with a couple unique flairs. So, I think once you choose Deathmatch you should then be able to choose which Phase everyone starts at. The most popular would probably be "Post-City Phase" with everything auto-researched already. The only difference would be that any paired techs would not be auto-researched yet, the player having to choose which one they want. Since it's Deathmatch, they cost no resources or research time, the player just has to choose. And then resources-wise every player starts out with 40000 of every resource. The name of the game is building up and expanding as fast as possible while pumping out tons of troops for massive battles early on.
  10. @wowgetoffyourcellphone Have you planned on adding gold as other resource and add unique gold mines, theres mercenary camp in your gameplay features but what about gold mines and mini factions near them for 3 purposes: slavery market, trading post, or enemies to capture the gold mine (maybe slaves as a loot resources from destroying houses). i apologize if I'm not very explicit I'm using phone browser.
  11. I am playing 0 A.D. for quite a while now. I like the game a lot. One thing I do not like is, maps often times look pretty at the beginning, but over time the look and feel of maps decline because of massive deforestation. The maps start to look very empty. Furthermore, deforestation seems to have been an issue for the Roman empire: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_during_the_Roman_period#Consequences_of_deforestation - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/45407393_Ancient_Deforestation_Revisited There are games in which trees grow slowly over time and are therefore a renewable resource. One game which implements such a model is Stronghold Crusader. I would love to see small trees spawning and growing over time in 0 A. D. I think this would make long matches or scenarios in which one side does not have a lot resources more interesting. After all wood is a renewable resource.
  12. I would like to see a weather simulation in 0 A.D. It would be nice to have weather events such as rain, dark clouds, bright sun, snow and desert winds. This would produces an entirely different feeling in maps. However, weather simulations can become annoying if they influence the map or game play to much.
  13. There are few problem that I want to discuss:- 1. We knew that Darius, Alexander or Romans all were successful because of their superior infantry. But, in 0ad gameplay we can constantly observe that skirmishers and slingers are the determining force rather than infantry. If someone make 30 skirmishers and employs them to kill 30 spearmen or swordsmen then he/she will loss only a few troops whereas the infantry side may lose all of his/her troops. But in reality it won't happens. I think the main problem of ranged unit lies in the idea of unlimited ammunition. A skirmishers can throw javelins constantly. But he needs to refill his supply after sometimes. But it won't happens. Maybe a 3 seconds gap would be sufficient for refilling. I think it can be solved by limiting the number of projectiles for skirmishers, slingers and archers according to their damage. 2. Secondly, a pikeman and skirmishers working speed is same but not their walking speeds which has a large impact on economy. We know that pikemen are slow unit in warfare but when it comes to working he is equally capable of working as fast as a skirmisher. So, I would prefer a common walking speed during doing some job for both of them. Maybe there would be some arming time(i.e. 2-3 seconds). During that time he would have a reduced armour, health and attack. As we know no one carries weapon during working. 3. Thirdly it was widely discussed topic, whether ram needs man power to move or not. I think it needs. Maybe a ram should costs 2 population. But it needs additional 3 men to move it on. On the other hand elephant have a crush damage but it won't applicable for fortress. But a herd of elephants can destroy it. So, I think a elephant would cost 5 population and it have a health of 750. But on the other hand a ram should be only a siege rather attacking units and can be captured. That's all.
  14. When I start the Millennium A.D mod I can see all the 0 A.D. factions. It would be nice if all 0 A.D. factions could be disabled and only the Millennium A.D. factions are visible. In my opinion it would be nice if Millennium A.D becomes a standalone game in the future. So, that other people can create mods for Millennium A.D.
  15. (tl;dr in the end.) Hey! I just bring this discussion to the forum and to the players. That has been discussed before, the last time I recall, here. I think that a game that can be win with an only strategy is not fun. (who haves more ranged cav.) I know that everybody have is perfect game in mind, the devs can't please everybody. But, some of us love discussing this kind of things and give our opinion, so a little more of spam about game design won't hurt, if it's polite. Some arguments of the devs patch discussion: I think that you can still be a competitive player and and enjoy doing the right strategy and tactic, having fun. I don't think that competition and fun are a disjunctive, (although I know that a high competitive scene can kill the game, a good basis of that can be a good attraction to players). I restarted to play multiplayer this days, and I played a few, and seems that the cav skirmish rush it's very unbeatable. Correct me if I'm wrong because my biased low numbers of games, there's a way to counter that strategy? If yes, I would rethink all. A. Possible counters with the actual design 1) Towers seems that when cav skirmishers gain a critical mass, doesn't kill them because the spread of the arrows. Is there a way to make the arrows like the aoe2? They are fired independent? Also, they don't work well if you have to cover to much territory, because the mobility of the cav skirmishers. This is a good design IMO cause the early role (for me) of the cav skirmishers should attack weak points. Solution proposal 1: Fix the spread of the arrows of the towers, add a bonus of them against ranged cav. 2) Melee infantry should stay as it is, I think. 3) Ranged infantry gets killed by the superior HP of the cav. But, by the way, It's cost effective against them? I don't have the numbers. In Total War, ranged infantry counters ranged cav (big target, against small target, but maybe that doesn't stand historicity and it's just a gameplay decision) Solution proposal 2: Make cheaper ranged infantry, or more expensive the cav skirmishers (in resources or in population) or add a bonus of ranged infantry against ranged cav (or both) My opinion would be that the cost are fine. Maybe a population increase. Although in scheme I would give them a bonus, first I know that you don't like hard counters, and second, if ranged infantry is very useful against cav skirmishers (and every civ has them), would make them obsolete and people would just train back ranged infantry. Don't like this solution. B. Changing cav skirmishers (and cav archers) I think that harassing should be possible, even a way to victory, but has to be balanced to have a viable strategy to counter them. Nerfing the cav skirmishers stats shoudn't make them unusable the rest of the game. The patch proposes disabling the training of the unit in the CC. As other proposals, this change is a retardant of the ability to training them (having corrals, the need of a specific tech, an upgrade in the barracks, etc.). This will work only if enough breath is created to make others strategy viable. But having them on the barracks, delays with a good time and price the ability to make them, and makes you choose between making cav skirmishers and rush, or train c/s for wood booming (and defending). Also t delays the food booming of hunting or corrals. I'm strong in favour with this. You still have cav skirmishers in phase I to do that. And a explorer unit could be created, with the skirmisher skin, but without the javelins props (with a low limit, or without it) for training in the CC (and without gathering meat capacity?) I agree in the viability thing of the unit, as I said it before. I don't have an opinion on the accuracy, but maybe nerfing that makes them unviable. It depens on numbers. Also, an direct way of nerfing them, and for me it have a degree of realism (maybe I'm wrong), it's to make them unable of herding. I don't see mounted people taking food from sheeps. Although maybe hunting is the same (you need stealth skills), I think that have cav hunting have some fun and maybe it hasn't to be removed. C. Introducing a new counter (Cav swordmen) Having the cav skirmishers and their natural counter be able to train in the same time, it's just a necessity. Right now, by stats, isn't the cav swordmen the designed counter? (and one of the most available units for most civs?) Having the possibility of choose, maybe lead to a breath in the soft-counter system, giving more sense to train spearmen, and then swordmen or ranged infantry to counter the spears. But where they would train, the two in the CC? This proposal would be paired with the disabling of the training in the CC of the cav skirmishers. So a tl;dr of solutions or proposals: You can take them all, you can take one, or you can't take anyone at all: -Towers: 1) fix spread 2) add a counter bonus against ranged cav -Ranged infantry: 3) Change cost and/or population of cav skirmishers or ranged infantry to be cost effective against the first. 4) add a counter bonus against ranged cav -Ranged cav 5) Nerf them (but thinking about later viability) 6) Disable to training in the CC and be only trainable on barracks 6.1) And replace them with a explorer unit in the CC 7) Disable the ability to herd 7.1) Disable to ability to herd and to hunt -Cav swordmen 8) Be able to training them in barracks in phase I My opinion would be in favour in fixing towers with an added bonus against ranged cav, maybe increase pop of all cavalry, 6), disabling them in the CC, disabling the ability to herd, and maybe allow cav swordmen to be build in phase I (if there's enough effective counters, I wouldn't). I'm against nerf them. Remember that the changes and solution have to affect also the (Egyptian cav archers). Different solutions, different approaches. PD: I don't know if devs want to bring the Phabricator discussions here.. If not, I won't do it again.
  16. In 2010-2012 I played Age Of Mythology on an out-dated machine and I managed to get good at playing the different factions. I am familiar with RTS but I suck at 0 AD. I installed the game (not from source this time) and I managed to advance into the 2nd age, then I was gathering resources and building more stuff when I was attacked, which stalled my progress to the point that I decided to quit. What is the best way to defend? Should I prioritise the blacksmith upgrades, guard towers or should I build a specific mixture of infantry? Different games have different rules. In Command & Conquer 3 buildings cost a lot of money, so it pays to only build one war factory. 8-bit Armies is different, because each additional motorpool (war factory) gives you a 1x bonus, so you can stack the bonus and get 4x unit production. 8-bit Armies relies on unit spam. CnC 3 relies on slow base expansion and units are strongly biased: being anti-infantry or anti-tank ... you cannot mob enemy units because of the strict balance, unit spam is awful in CnC 3 and doesn't work very well. I'm not sure where I'd rank 0 AD on these things.
  17. 0 A.D Mod Introduction to Antiquorum Antiquorum is a large-scale modification for the game focusing mainly on historical authenticity and completely reworking the games unit roster and balance throughout the phases. These additions add a whole new aspect to the game and would allow more variation in game battle compositions as well as overall strategies for certain civilisations. Currently, I'm working on this onerous task alone, but if you are interested in helping out you can contact me. Feedback and constructive criticism are welcome as well! Gameplay Changes The mod will focus on slower gameplay, adding a more diverse and strategical look on the game. Random maps will most likely be prominent in the mod seeing as I want scouting to stay important. Starting metal and stone mines will be placed much further away from the civic centre most likely. LOS will generally be much smaller than the base game. Unit Roster & Unit Creation Changes Overview Civic centres now only train women/villagers and the very basic unit of most factions. The Spearman. Certain civilisations might have exceptions. The barracks unlock several early units you would expect from a barracks and cc in the main game (not all!). The barracks cost has been increased. This gives players a more significant choice of economy or military. It also makes raiding with cavalry a much more viable strategy in the game. Light cavalry is much cheaper now. New Slaves fully implemented to all factions, created in the market (Have a finite life span). Numerous new units added to the game. Unit Class/Structure After reviewing the situation with my mod, I have decided to follow a Unit structure much like @wowgetoffyourcellphone's proposal in this thread (Did not quote here to save space): 1. Slave - Their sole use is for the economy, if possible, male and female versions. Possible short lifetime? (Can't build?) 2. Citizen/Villager - Much like the basic villager in the main game, a possible aura that gives nearby slaves a gathering bonus? 3. Citizen Soldiers - Normal barracks military units generally used for attacking, can also build military structures. Have the same aura as citizens. They do not gather materials. 4. Champions/Trained Soldiers - Trained from city phase buildings (<<<< There might be exceptions). Professional/Trained soldiers with a sole purpose of fighting/capturing. 5. Heroes - Very minor changes (balancing etc.). For the most part will stay the same as the main game. +. Extras - Mercenaries may vary, sometimes fitting in the citizen soldiers category (Maybe their own since they will not be proper citizens), Champions/Trained soldiers, and possibly even slaves? Quick Note: If you have any ideas for a new unit to be added to the game, please visit this google form and fill it out! This would be Hugely Appreciated, Thankyou. So hope you all enjoyed this little teaser! Look forward to heavy updates! Cheers,
  18. If you're going to produce locked battalions from the barracks etc to reduce lag then embedding a priest, Archer or champion in the battalion is possible. For a basic battalions take your spear men (Or what ever) into blender clone them 10 times in two rows of five. Run the animation to check they look right. No clipping allowed. Add some loiter changes to one of the clones to add interest. Add a single hit box/ bounding box and center of rotation. Export as a new unit. Add a single damage bar. If it falls to 10% have that group unit despawn and spawn 3 or four lone spearmen. Who knows? They may still win. (Who are we kidding!) For a mixed unit of melee/ ranged formations. Clone a row of guys with shields or pikes and a row of guys with ranged weapons behind them. Off set them so they are not shooting their shield bearer in the back of the head. Add the bounding box, hit box etc. For a self healing unit add a priest to the back row and require the temple as the prerequisite for the formation. When destroyed the priest is one of the surviving single units. I can think of a few other formation combinations but you get the idea. Instead of players and AI spamming an ant train of hundreds of single units it's ten compound units (same total cost) with more hits and damage or number of attacks. Some being elites with healers in them. For facing add a second hit box offset to the rear so melee units attacking from the front don't "reach it" and make that immune to ranged weapons. A flanking melee unit will be in hit box to hit box contact with the back box and that triggers extra damage and other responses. I.e. The battalion might take extra damage. and spawn three or four individual units fighting for their lives in the back. ==================================================== Remember I can't see or read code so while I can see how to do it I can't code it. Don't all shoot me at once.
  19. I usually don't play as sparta, but: 1) As I said in the balancing topic some time ago, maybe the translation of Ekdromos Skiritai, Skiritai Commando, should be renamed: commando reminds to some kind of modern special ops unit. I propose Skiritai runner. Sources 1, 2. The explanation of why Mythos gave that name is here. 2) Maybe it could given to them spartan pikeman champs with a Cleomenes reforms tech to train them in barracks and in fortress (researched in the second building). They won't be benefited from agoge, so in late game you could have some more champs. 3) Give them walls? They already have the population malus/penalty. Or a tech that allow to build them in late game.
  20. Disclaimer : It is important that existing balance changes are not only rated by reading, but by testing. Means: Install and play the balance branch and install and play SVN/A17. The aim of this thread is creating a place where all ideas are merged together so we don't forget any. Also this is the place to vote for those ideas. I'll update this thread as thing goes, and moderate it. What we need for now is the list of all players, so we have a numeric idea on how many people play the balance branch. Please comment below to give me your names. Also we are thinking of launching a tournament so that we can gather interesting feedback. I proposed something similar (but it was only for the devs here : http://www.wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=19034 and here : http://www.wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=18484). If you want to say something in this aim that doesn't fit in this thread, just ask me by PM and /or ask me to come on IRC. At the end I plan to have an excel file, becoming bigger with all the ideas then shorter when everything has been voted. Of course I realise that may mean 'A : I want cav to be OP' 'B: Cav should be less OP'. But that will work for other things such as increasing the strength of the ram when units are garisonned in. Or maybe make it a mobile garison like walls. Regards Stan. I don't have access to excel for now so here is the list. I'm basing the popularity of the idea of the proposition on the number of likes of the post -Units garrisoned in batterings ram, should give a bonus: mov speed, damage and atk speed. 1 -Bonus for units in walls. Deals better than unit without protection. (Already In) -Slavery at market by each percentage of units killed. 2 -Make Qarthage be able to train biremes (at least) at the commercial dock. That way it doesn't get bummed over in Island maps. 2 -Make formations more of a Select a bunch of units then "form up" (maybe for flavor one of them get's "promoted" and a bubble appears over his head every time you issue an order. Formations should also disable gathering - to make moving through heavily resourced areas less of a pain.2 -Make ships not take population - but instead make them mobile walls. When in range of a dock (Qarthage's military dock would have a greater range) they can train "marine"(Civilised) or "boarder"(Barbarian) units for the ships. Boarders would be better at melee, where marines would have a ranged attack and melee attack. -Make units like Hastatus Have slowly rechargeable one-time ranged attack when not in melee. Iberians would have it on all their melee units, and have two - instead of one javelin. -Make persian immortals be trained as a toggle. EG: Persian palaces give a slow toggle of resources, yes? make the toggle trade that for immortals instead. -A new special for iberians (that isn't dependant on map makers and isn't ALWAYS deleted immediately at the start of the game) -slavery at market by each percentage of units killed. AoE3 had a building that could train cannons as a trickle so that the only cost was time (it was slow enough to be fair). I don't see why we couldn't do that in our game for some unit. 3 Votes Authorized Members (To get in this list just play) (15 players in total) - AceWild - alpha123 - Altamura - angelogenius - auron2401 - djjunde - Infoman - Itms - Jagster3r21 - LordIgorIIIofKiev - santa - Sanguivorant - Shaken_Vesper - tau - Tux - z
×
×
  • Create New...