Non-random BuildingAI

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

3 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Wait don't we already have the order sound when a waypoint is planted or added?

No, I don't hear one. Maybe we're mixing terms. I meant rally point. there is no flag planting sound. 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

ah rally point. In this case, I think it should be silent, because we wouldn't want both the building targeting sound to play at the same time as the rally point sound.

As is, its kind of nice that you get a visual for the rally flag and audio for arrows. It means when u just click on an enemy unit without hotkeys, both can occur nicely at the same time.

If not for the building targeting sound, I wouldn't be opposed to it.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

19 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

ah rally point. In this case, I think it should be silent, because we wouldn't want both the building targeting sound to play at the same time as the rally point sound.

errrr Complete disagree. Why would they play simultaneously? Almost every game I've played has a rally point sound. 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

17 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

errrr Complete disagree. Why would they play simultaneously? Almost every game I've played has a rally point sound. 

In this implementation, without the use of hotkeys, targeting building arrows and the rally point are the same. So in the video, if i just click on the ram, both the arrows and the rally point are set to the ram. This is done because it is easy and intuitive and it works for 90% of cases.

Hotkeys are needed if you want to separate the actions. Players that want fine tuned control can use the hotkeys more, but it takes a bit of effort.

On its own, yeah it would be fine. I'd just prefer something short and really simple.

Edited September 16 by real_tabasco_sauce

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

8 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

In this implementation, without the use of hotkeys, targeting building arrows and the rally point are the same. So in the video, if i just click on the ram, both the arrows and the rally point are set to the ram. This is done because it is easy and intuitive and it works for 90% of cases.

Hotkeys are needed if you want to separate the actions. Players that want fine tuned control can use the hotkeys more, but it takes a bit of effort.

In this case, I see no problem with the sounds occurring at the same time. 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

maybe its fine with the right sound. 

[Stan`]

We can ask samulis for some sounds if you can write a list with a short description and or examples. Of course will still need some code

[Gurken Khan]

 

2 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

IMHO, user input feedback is crucial. So whenever a player clicks something, be it a UI element or initiating a command in-game, it should usually have some kind of sound. 

I second this. Every command should give audio feedback. (Bothers me every time I make my healers attack move and they don't even say "yes".) Even if there were audio clutter I prefer it over no audio feedback.

 

2 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

So in the video, if i just click on the ram, both the arrows and the rally point are set to the ram.

In the vids you posted earlier today the rally point and the arrows seem to work independently of each other? I think the sound you selected for the arrows is good, but i also would like a "plonk" or thud for the rally point; maybe if there's nothing to target at the point not both sounds have to be played.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

5 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

In the vids you posted earlier today the rally point and the arrows seem to work independently of each other?

they can work independently of each other if you use the hotkeys 'autorally' and 'force-attack' to control garrison and arrows respectively.

But the default mode is for one click to set both since that is more common and easy to understand.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

For the community mod, I can't change defaults, so I think players will just need to bind force-attack to something else if they want to control in all three means i discussed above.

^the behavior for both autogarrison and force attack being bound to the same hotkey (ctrl by default) just results in force-attack coming out on top.

for a27, i think it would make sense to make force-attack 'f', since force capture is 'c'. Then follow unit could just be unbound by default.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

Ok the non-random arrows and ui improvements are working toward a building arrow overhaul. I've heard from a lot of players that because building arrows don't get much stronger as the game goes on, arrows are too strong in p1 and too weak in p2. So I came up with some changes to improve building arrows in general.

• Building prepare time 1200 -> 400.
  • buildings get value sooner when a unit steps into range.
  • The practical range of enemy structures is made more apparent when circling a structure.
• Tower and CC arrow damage: 10/11 pierce -> 8
• Fort arrow damage remains at 10.
• Generally speaking: building repeat time increased (more so for CC, less for towers,fort), building default arrows increased (more so for fortress, less so for towers,CC)
• Fortresses gain a minimum range

I added a new technology and restructured the existing tower technologies into something that will work for towers, forts, and CCs.

Sentries: unchanged

Crenellations:

• Towers +40% garrisoned arrows -> all building arrows +20% damage.
• available from the fortress too.

Arrow Shooters: unchanged

Sturdy foundations: made much cheaper
 

Murder holes -> moved to the fortress, affects fortresses as well as towers.

"Professional Garrisons" (coins above) supersedes crenellations in the fort, and is another 20% arrow damage for all buildings as well as +4 default arrows for the fortress only.

Edited September 17 by real_tabasco_sauce

[chrstgtr]

This is getting complicated…why not make it an auto researched tech upon phasing? Clicking on a bunch of technologies isn’t fun. Nor is wasting resources/time to have a minimally functioning building that you already had to pay for/build. What you’ve done makes it complicated while actually having the same (or fewer) number of features

just work backwards from current arrow strength in p3 against all pierce armor techs and have p2 be arrow strength if .85 of that and p1 be .85 of p2 (or whatever the percents are, I’m not by a computer at the moment)  

also, I would leave Crenellations untouched. It’s basically the only tower tech that is ever worth researching (although the distance tech would become worthwhile if non-random gets implemented). 
 

lastly. I would make all tower techs impact all defensive buildings. Having some techs effect some buildings but not others is an extra layer of complication without a ton of reason. Looking for all these techs in different buildings also seems like a complication without any real benefit/reason

 

edit: with all these changes we can hopefully (finally) get a final yes/no vote on this. This has been exhausting for something that a very limited number of people seem to actively want. I’m skeptical (don’t agree with the premise that rush is too strong or that arrows are weak late) but you’ve tried to address my two primary concerns that I’ve been voicing for the last year or so (OP early and weak late). So let’s see

Edited September 18 by chrstgtr

[real_tabasco_sauce]

31 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

This is getting complicated…why not make it an auto researched tech upon phasing? Clicking on a bunch of technologies isn’t fun.

I suppose this could be done, but the tower techs are largely unhelpful/uninteresting save for crenellations. Crenelations currently only buffs garrisoned structures, while the tech is redesigned to be a more general-purpose damage buff.

my approach was to try and re-purpose existing techs to be more applicable to arrows in general.

Edited September 18 by real_tabasco_sauce

[real_tabasco_sauce]

Also, I should nerf siege towers a little.

[chrstgtr]

25 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

I suppose this could be done, but the tower techs are largely unhelpful/uninteresting save for crenellations.

I agree. That is why I don't understand why the biggest change was done to Crenelations.

25 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

the tech is redesigned to be a more general-purpose damage buff.

I get that. But its a necessary tech in order for the building to have any real use. That makes those buildings incredibly expensive. It also kills the purpose of the buildings--if you are turtling because you are slow then you won't be able to research it early enough anyways and you'll never get a fort up to research your extra new tech. It just doesn't make sense. 

24 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Also, I should nerf siege towers a little.

Good catch. I've missed how the non-random building AI worked with them--they were briefly playable again

Edited September 18 by chrstgtr

[real_tabasco_sauce]

imo crenellations is pretty quirky:

depending on rounding, you get different numbers of additional arrows. With a fully garrisoned tower, you get 2 additonal arrows.

I don't like that it leaves ungarrisoned towers unaffected, and that there are no general upgrades affecting non-tower arrows. In general, defensive buildings being next to useless (for defense) if not garrisoned is sub-optimal.

 

Edited September 18 by real_tabasco_sauce

[chrstgtr]

6 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

I don't like that it leaves ungarrisoned towers unaffected, and that there are no general upgrades affecting non-tower arrows. In general, defensive buildings being next to useless (for defense) if not garrisoned is sub-optimal.

 

Disagree. That is like saying melee bonus isn't good because you made all skirm. The tech does what it does. It is very useful when used correctly

45 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

depending on rounding, you get different numbers of additional arrows. With a fully garrisoned tower, you get 2 additonal arrows.

Your complaint with this seems better directed towards the sentries tech, which I find pretty useless in its current form. 

If the tech actually impacted CCs and forts then it would be useful/interesting. The iber hero is real good for this. 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

9 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

imo crenellations is pretty quirky:

depending on rounding, you get different numbers of additional arrows. With a fully garrisoned tower, you get 2 additonal arrows.

I don't like that it leaves ungarrisoned towers unaffected

With some tweaks it can be alright. I don't mind quirky techs.

 

9 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

In general, defensive buildings being next to useless (for defense) if not garrisoned is sub-optimal

HARD AGREE. Defensive buildings are way too easy to capture, for example. And people really don't want to have to garrison and ungarrison units all the time to keep these buildings whole and useful. I know it brings a level of skill to the game, but couldn't that APM be used elsewhere?

[Atrik]

3 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

HARD AGREE. Defensive buildings are way too easy to capture, for example.

They are impossible to capture if they are garrisoned in p3 and full hp. I'm sure most will agree that defenses buildings are balanced (in a26).

3 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

And people really don't want to have to garrison and ungarrison units all the time to keep these buildings whole and useful. I know it brings a level of skill to the game, but couldn't that APM be used elsewhere?

It is very easy to extend the "Alert" Panel to have more options to help this. Actually my first ever mod was adding the following "Alerts" buttons:

• [Hide icon] Females garrison to houses only
• [Tower up icon] Soldiers garrison to defenses buildings (Soldiers go in towers, cc and forts)
• [Sally out icon] Ungarrison all soldiers from defenses buildings.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

4 minutes ago, Atrik said:

They are impossible to capture if they are garrisoned in p3 and full hp. I'm sure most will agree that defenses buildings are balanced (in a26).

The massive swing between easy af to capture and then suddenly to impossible to capture is not balanced.

 

6 minutes ago, Atrik said:

It is very easy to extend the "Alert" Panel to have more options to help this. Actually my first ever mod was adding the following "Alerts" buttons:

• [Hide icon] Females garrison to houses only
• [Tower up icon] Soldiers garrison to defenses buildings (Soldiers go in towers, cc and forts)
• [Sally out icon] Ungarrison all soldiers from defenses buildings.

Might be useful in general, whether we agree about the other balancing issues or not. 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

Ok, well if I leave crenellations alone, I think I would have to let damage be phase dependent, which maybe isn't so bad since capture point regen is also phase dependent.

If I revert crenellations as is, I would have to come up with another tech to serve as the first arrow damage increase which would make the tech situation more complicated.

Edited September 19 by real_tabasco_sauce

[real_tabasco_sauce]

Ok so I made the changes described above and added a phase dependent building damage buff of 20%

Here is the current version if anyone wants to test:

community-testing.zip

Just unzip it to your mods folder, the directory name will be correct.

Edited September 21 by real_tabasco_sauce

[real_tabasco_sauce]

@Vantha

I came up with a tooltip image for these:

The tooltip images are all 512 by 512 so I made this also that size. However, the other tooltip images don't look very square:

https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/Vantha/0ad/src/commit/e9257edcdb5a3b02815b69ff90acd28b13c6107d/binaries/data/mods/public/art/textures/ui/loading/tips/army_camp.png

 

Edited September 22 by real_tabasco_sauce

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

1 hour ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

@Vantha

I came up with a tooltip image for these:

The tooltip images are all 512 by 512 so I made this also that size. However, the other tooltip images don't look very square:

https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/Vantha/0ad/src/commit/e9257edcdb5a3b02815b69ff90acd28b13c6107d/binaries/data/mods/public/art/textures/ui/loading/tips/army_camp.png

 

The actual tooltip images are a 512x384 image on a 512x512 texture. Reason it's a 512x512 texture and not 512x384 texture is for maximum graphics card compatibility (some newer cards are ok with odd-sized textures, but most older cards only want ^2 resolution textures).

 

We went with 512x384 px images instead of perfectly square for aesthetic reasons. The rectangle shape just looks nicer to the human eye in this context, similar to the ratio of an old CRT TV or computer monitor. 

[real_tabasco_sauce]