Suggestion: no garrison - no arrows.

[Sodalite]

I think I have a fair enough suggestion to turn off the arrow attack on all non-garrisoned buildings, siege weapons and ships. How do you like this idea?

[Gurken Khan]

Not at all.

[Player of 0AD]

For siege towers its already the case

For ships it might be not optimal, because you would always need to garrison them, so its more micro-management

For buildings it would mean more micro-management too, but it could make sense because it makes turtling weaker

[Yekaterina]

I like this idea. But towers are sometimes ineffective in late game, so a few adjustments:

• The player can command the tower where to shoot; they can choose to focus fire at one enemy unit or just spread out its attack.
• The arrow damage from towers increases for town phase and city phase. This is because in late game, both players would have bigger armies and more military techs. So what had been a lethal damage in Village phase is insignificant in City Phase.

10 pierce in village phase is a lot, because in comparison, infantry archers do only 6-7 and no one has upgraded armour. However, in city phase, something with 10 pierce is just weak because even an upgraded archer is 11-13; slingers 18 and skirmishers 26. Everyone also has upgraded armour. So in City phase, the towers should to at least 16 damage per shot to be significant at all.

The justification: the archer inside is now better trained and has better equipment.

But to prevent turtling, the first unit inside give the tower 2 arrows per second, then the later ones add one each until a maximum of 5 arrows per tower. So if the player wants to turtle, they have to garrison more units inside towers - their land army is weak so now they are susceptible to siege attacks.

[Gurken Khan]

18 minutes ago, Helicity said:

The arrow damage from towers increases for town phase and city phase.

I like that idea.

[Player of 0AD]

1 hour ago, Gurken Khan said:

I like that idea.

I hate it

[alre]

make it into a tech

[Lion.Kanzen]

23 minutes ago, alre said:

make it into a tech

this makes better sense. limit it to start at 0 and add +1(attack) then x2(arrows) damage and then increase by 50%.

[Yekaterina]

We can make better tower techs and we can also have better resistance techs against arrows from the tower.

[alre]

55 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

this makes better sense. limit it to start at 0 and add +1(attack) then x2(arrows) damage and then increase by 50%.

no. it should not start at 0.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Just now, alre said:

no. it should not start at 0.

How would it be then?

[Sodalite]

6 hours ago, Player of 0AD said:

For ships it might be not optimal, because you would always need to garrison them, so its more micro-management

For buildings it would mean more micro-management too, but it could make sense because it makes turtling weaker

In this case, let the ships have an initial attack equal to the number of places the ship occupies in the population counter. But, since the buildings do not take away a single residential place, it would be fair to at least deprive them of the opportunity to attack without a garrison inside. Among other things, developers should nerf elite units...

[alre]

1 hour ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

How would it be then?

initial arrows can stay as they are.

I was thinking about a tech for enhancing attack damage, but also it would make sense to just have buildings also be affected by forge ranged damage techs.

[Lion.Kanzen]

2 minutes ago, alre said:

initial arrows can stay as they are.

I'm ok with this.

 

4 minutes ago, alre said:

I was thinking about a tech for enhancing attack damage, but also it would make sense to just have buildings also be affected by forge ranged damage techs.

All of this makes sense.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

7 hours ago, Player of 0AD said:

For buildings it would mean more micro-management too, but it could make sense because it makes turtling weaker

Well the whole point of getting towers is that you gain a measure of defense without any population cost. I think it is important that towers, CCs and forts have default arrows so that they are important for map control. I made a patch and a community mod branch to make buildings not target randomly. What this would do is make buildings better against smaller raiding groups, and actually kill units among a large army instead of damaging them all slightly.

Balance would follow of course, for example, IDK why a CC has almost as much firepower as a fort. I think forts should have more default arrows than CCs.

As for ships,@wowgetoffyourcellphone is/will be working on a ship rework to make them proper units instead of using buildingAI, which I think will be a huge improvement for ships (among other things like scaling them down some).

For towers, another option for decreased effectiveness with pierce armor would be to decrease their damage a little and make them ignore armor.

haha never mind thats a terrible idea. I'd say just keep the damage models the same tbh, or replace the increased arrow count upgrade for increased damage upgrade (available in city?)

Edited April 27, 2023 by real_tabasco_sauce

[real_tabasco_sauce]

5 hours ago, Helicity said:

But to prevent turtling

Side note, why do people think turtling is good? If someone has a bunch of towers and forts, just go around it, attack elsewhere, or force them to move to your army.

At the worst, it's just a very annoying strategy.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Just now, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Side note, why do people think turtling is good? If someone has a bunch of towers and forts, just go around it, attack elsewhere, or force them to move to your army.

At the worst, it's just a very annoying strategy.

They should play Stronghold

It's basically siege castles. literally hours of siege, hence my desire to add more siege techniques to the game and more fire damage.

 

You would have to lower the armor of the towers, it's very op but keep the wall and fortresses.

[Yekaterina]

57 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

It's basically siege castles. literally hours of siege, hence my desire to add more siege techniques to the game and more fire damage.

That's exactly what we need: better siege. Cheaper siege techs at least.

[Lion.Kanzen]

2 minutes ago, Helicity said:

That's exactly what we need: better siege. Cheaper siege techs at least.

 

I'm not saying your ideas are bad, just that they need some consideration and research.

You should gain more experience by playing more games and also by living life.

 

I understand that you want to implement catapults, you must use your imagination to immerse yourself in what that era was like and what was being done.

For example I consider that 0AD should have a suicide unit that does damage as in other strategy games.

Example suicide units that do damage to buildings, that idea is from SC2 (Bannelings) and the Petards from AoE II plus the Slaves from Stronghold.

[Sodalite]

23 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Side note, why do people think turtling is good? If someone has a bunch of towers and forts, just go around it, attack elsewhere, or force them to move to your army.

At the worst, it's just a very annoying strategy.

I believe that unarmed towers and fortresses without a garrison add more strategic planning to the game and you will have to find compromises for each important point on the map - send a garrison to the castle and weaken the invading army, or gather as many units as possible on a campaign, thereby exposing the rear. As for me, this will deepen the strategic component very much, and will also serve as a source of tantrums for the losers.

[Dakara]

Hello, 

no

 

[Sodalite]

On 27/04/2023 at 8:10 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

Example suicide units that do damage to buildings, that idea is from SC2 (Bannelings) and the Petards from AoE II plus the Slaves from Stronghold.

In the Empires: Dawn of the Modern World, you could send a plague-infected soldier to the enemy, who died and infected with the plague everyone he caught along the way.

[Sodalite]

20 hours ago, Dakara said:

Hello, 

no

By the way, in Gray Goo, each turret ate a place from the population.

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

8 minutes ago, Sodalite said:

In the Empires: Dawn of the Modern World, you could send a plague-infected soldier to the enemy, who died and infected with the plague everyone he caught along the way.

That would be ideal for units not buildings, but it is a good example of a suicidal unit.

[Sodalite]

4 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

That would be ideal for units not buildings, but it is a good example of a suicidal unit.

Well, for buildings, you can make two slow units that carry a vessel of oil and spill it into a large burning pool at the time of death.