Game Balance: Battering Rams, the 0 A.D. tanks?...

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

4 hours ago, krt0143 said:

The towers and castles in 0 A.D are just 1:1 copies of AoE's Hollywood vision of early history...

It's a video game. The Fortress serves an interesting gameplay purpose.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

4 hours ago, krt0143 said:

The towers and castles in 0 A.D are just 1:1 copies of AoE's Hollywood vision of early history...

No, plenty of original effort went into the towers and forts in 0ad.

The fact of the matter is that this is a videogame, and making everything into a reality simulator makes the game boring. For example, lets make all the buildings take hours to build. Nice. Also, we can let sicknesses randomly kill a unit every 5 seconds. Nice.

[alre]

I agree the game would look more realistic if fortresses were not miniature versions of weirdly square strongholds that throw showers of arrows at a large range, but were instead larger concentric defenses, including patrols, palisades and killzones, then finally a fortified position on a pre-existing hill, where the garrison retreats when the threat is nearest.

But that would be hella complicate to realize and a miniature version of a conventionally shaped stronghold does the job of representing map control and also looks cuter in the process.

[krt0143]

13 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

It's a video game. The Fortress serves an interesting gameplay purpose.

Sure, and I don't complain, I'm just saying that for this time period their existence isn't very realistic. And I definitely agree there was some serious effort to make them civilization-specific.

Please rest reassured I'm not dissing 0 A.D. here, I'm the first to admit it's a game and fun should take the lead.

 

Now for the ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam: Rams are overpowered...

My strategy is to usually build groups of 10-20 rams and send them in waves into the enemy camp (I've scouted before). The enemy kills some, but can't block all. And since the AI doesn't repair (much?), the next wave finishes what the previous started... Once there are no civil centers left (easy to spot due to their influence borders), and all enemy towers have been destroyed, and all civil buildings have turned to Gaia, I just send in the cavalry and a few (10-20) spearmen to mop up the survivors. Works every time, even more easily on maps with water where you can land near your target and avoid a long journey.

In my game I've now weakened all rams by making them even slower, twice as long to repair, and by upping all fortress/tower resistances from their initial Hack:20, Pierce:35, Crush:3  to a more serious Hack:55, Pierce:55, Crush:10 *. This gives the defender more time to do something. Previously, if no ram-busting unit was already very near the attacked structure there was no time to do anything, the structure was doomed: 3-4 seconds and the mighty wall was rubble... Yes, I didn't change their attack values, because they should remain deadly against other targets (civil buildings, wooden structures, etc.).

 

* I would also had substantially increased the cost of towers/fortresses, but since the AI apparently loves building dense networks of towers and fortresses I'm afraid this might cause it to outspend itself, USSR-like...
 

[Atrik]

Maybe also the siege towers would be usable to capture defensive buildings rather then being hit and run units. I guess wouldn't be a problem giving it some capture strength based on units garrisoned.

[krt0143]

15 hours ago, Atrik said:

Maybe also the siege towers would be usable to capture defensive buildings

Siege towers should simply be a means to bypass walls, like they were in reality. The point of a siege tower was to 1. clean the top of the wall of defenders (by being able to shoot down on them), and then 2. let your own soldiers easily get up there using the stairs inside the siege tower.
(Disclaimer: I saw there are siege towers in 0 A.D., but didn't experience them yet in the game, so I don't know what they actually do/don't do.)

[Gurken Khan]

1 hour ago, krt0143 said:

(Disclaimer: I saw there are siege towers in 0 A.D., but didn't experience them yet in the game, so I don't know what they actually do/don't do.)

I saw them used in TGs basically as tanks: loaded up with units, nearly immune against ranged damage while dishing out plenty of ranged dmg themselves.

[krt0143]

59 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

used in TGs

What's a TG?

 

1 hour ago, Gurken Khan said:

loaded up with units, nearly immune against ranged damage while dishing out plenty of ranged dmg themselves

Yes, that's precisely what should be avoided at all cost.

For the game to be fun you need to really need all those different units, ranged units to soften up the enemy, melee units to protect the ranged ones, cavalry to make quick movements (and scout), fortifications to protect your city, and some heavy, slow, specialized units to breach fortifications, and so on.
In short, it should be a more sophisticated version of the "rock-paper-scissors" game, each unit having its strength and weakness, all completing each other, and you can't possibly win without using all of them, because if you're all "rock", the opponent will build lots of "paper" and you're toast.

For this reason there should not be any "superunit", able to run the show all on its own, because else there is no point in creating all the other units!... The game becomes just a boring race to the point you can create that superunit and flood the adversary with them.
There is a reason heroes are limited to 1 copy. Maybe 0 A.D. siege units need some similar limitation?

[Gurken Khan]

4 minutes ago, krt0143 said:

What's a TG?

team game

 

4 minutes ago, krt0143 said:

Yes, that's precisely what should be avoided at all cost.

I hardly see them used, maybe one team member assumes the role of utilizing them; like all siege they're slow and clunky.

[krt0143]

5 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

like all siege they're slow and clunky.

They can afford to be slow, since they are close to invulnerable... 

 

Seriously, they might be less of a pain on tiny maps, but I play on giant maps, and thus have to position groups of axemen on all paths the AI might use to send rams my way, because rams might be slow, but they will have finished razing my town(s) well before my pedestrian anti-ram squads reach them... 
(Note I did something similar for my anti-siege squads in AoE2, except I used chevaliers, which moved faster.)

And I'm more worried for the human player in the human vs. AI game, the AI has the advantage of being both omniscient and lightning fast, always optimizing its troops and able to instantly recover after about any kind of disaster. The poor standard single-core 1 Hz human using a clunky remote interface to the computer is really at a disadvantage here.

 

[Gurken Khan]

10 minutes ago, krt0143 said:

the AI has the advantage of being both omniscient and lightning fast, always optimizing its troops and able to instantly recover after about any kind of disaster.

I would argue to what degree that is true. And you have the advantage of the AI being dumb; I assume dumber than you.

[krt0143]

22 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

And you have the advantage of the AI being dumb

Dumb but lightning fast! 

And given this game is a race, my (hopefully) superior intelligence doesn't really come to play. The AI speed overwhelms me long before I manage to bring my elaborate plans () to fruition...

(I'd really like the AI to be slower. Not dumber, not poorer, not whatever, just slower.)

[alre]

13 minutes ago, krt0143 said:

Dumb but lightning fast! 

And given this game is a race, my (hopefully) superior intelligence doesn't really come to play. The AI speed overwhelms me long before I manage to bring my elaborate plans () to fruition...

(I'd really like the AI to be slower. Not dumber, not poorer, not whatever, just slower.)

the AI difficulty parameter does exactly that.

[krt0143]

37 minutes ago, alre said:

the AI difficulty parameter does exactly that

Does it? IIRC it says difficulty level changes the AI's resources gathering rate, and the easiest levels also have a slower research, training and building rate. I'd like to have a slower unit training rate, without the resource gathering limitation. (Or ideally, ways to set all those parameters to your liking).

- On "Very Easy" the AI is a pushover, totally apathetic. It does send some units my way, not too many, but builds no ships and no siege weapons. It's a good setting to get your bearings, but gets quickly boring.
- On "Easy" it does send a huge lot of units my way, a never ending host of units actually, but only a single ram every now and then. Manageable, but the AI's inhuman relentlessness still leaves a bad aftertaste, it should mark a pause from time to time...
- On "Normal" it sends a real deluge of units my way, and dozens of rams, to the point I'm totally swamped: The came consists at trying to survive as long as possible (usually not very long...).

I haven't tried the other difficulties, on those I guess the AI instantly fills the map up to the treetops with units...

 

[Vrayer]

Here we gathered advices for beginers wich should help you not having any trouble with any AI, 

 

[Gurken Khan]

@krt0143 I guess there's no helping some people.

If you refuse to lower the gathering rate of the enemy and refuse to lower the game speed then I'll guess you just have to suffer until u get gud.

Spoiler

A while ago when I was messing with the settings I inadvertently raised the AI difficulty and was surprised when it suddenly built fortresses and did other stuff I had not seen before. lol

 

[krt0143]

1 hour ago, Vrayer said:

Research eco tech

What's "eco tech"? I don't think I recognize this one (do Brits have it? I'm always playing Brits).

Anyway, thanks for the link, but that's precisely how I do not want to play... The problem is that if you can write a step-by-step instruction, you can as well automate the whole thing, create a macro, there is no point involving a human, not this human at least. I'm a creative, I want to plan, plot, scheme, but certainly not calculate...

That's why I create my own scenarios, totally skewed, bizarre scenarios, where you need to think outside the box and find ways to adapt to some always new, unique situation. Sorry, playing one after the other "create 50 this, then create 20 that" type scenario and trying to optimize your timing isn't fun for me. I have always hated platform games too. 

YMMV and all that. I do not say that I'm right and you're wrong, it's simply that our tastes and what we're looking for in this game differ, that's all.

 

1 hour ago, Gurken Khan said:

If you refuse to lower the gathering rate of the enemy and refuse to lower the game speed

I definitely want to lower the game speed -- for the AI!

(48th take : ) What I want is an enemy who has human-like limits. I do not want to fight a monster which can manage two dozen production queues simultaneously and has the relentless obstinacy of a Terminator! But I don't want to face a senile slug either. I'm pretty sure there must be a setting possible between those two...
Just saying.

[ShadowOfHassen]

 

39 minutes ago, krt0143 said:

What's "eco tech"? I don't think I recognize this one (do Brits have it? I'm always playing Brits).

Anyway, thanks for the link, but that's precisely how I do not want to play... The problem is that if you can write a step-by-step instruction, you can as well automate the whole thing, create a macro, there is no point involving a human, not this human at least. I'm a creative, I want to plan, plot, scheme, but certainly not calculate...

That's why I create my own scenarios, totally skewed, bizarre scenarios, where you need to think outside the box and find ways to adapt to some always new, unique situation. Sorry, playing one after the other "create 50 this, then create 20 that" type scenario and trying to optimize your timing isn't fun for me. I have always hated platform games too. 

YMMV and all that. I do not say that I'm right and you're wrong, it's simply that our tastes and what we're looking for in this game differ, that's all.

 

I definitely want to lower the game speed -- for the AI!

(48th take : ) What I want is an enemy who has human-like limits. I do not want to fight a monster which can manage two dozen production queues simultaneously and has the relentless obstinacy of a Terminator! But I don't want to face a senile slug either. I'm pretty sure there must be a setting possible between those two...
Just saying.

This is a problem that I've found with 0 A.D. --Real quick preface is that I'm not the best RTS player, but I think I'm pretty good, but there are some bad balances with both 0 A.D.'s AI and the game itself

I have not played it, but I've heard stories about people playing competitive World of Warcraft where they had to send EXACTLY two soldiers to collect gold, Exactly two to build and then train 10 grunts and blitz, because that's what everyone else did.

0 A.D. seems like this. OK, there are some ways in the game where you shouldn't be able to everything. (If I just pick flowers in minecraft I'm going to get myself killed really quickly) but 0 A.D. should not have a specific "way" to win. OK, you do need to shoot for wood and meat in the first level, but I should be able to do it in different ways. I should be rewarded by putting a few soldiers on metal and stone at the beginning. I shouldn't have to pour everything  I've got into soldiers, because if I don't, I get mobbed by 50 spearmen 10 minutes unto the game. Building walls would counteract the spearmen, but I'd need the resources and builders for that, and that requires more soldiers and I can't get all of that done.

How can this be addressed? Firstly, by rewarding players for branching out. My suggestion was to change the resources required by the resource gathering upgrades, so that the player, if he put people on metal, would be rewarded by making his wood soldiers get upgraded, yes you could ignore that, but now its a choice. Just getting wood and metal might allow me to get lower costs, but If I can wide balance it, my late game time will be easier.

Then in regard to rams. @Vantha's been doing more research, but in ancient times a siege ram would be murdered by a handful of men without protection. It should destroy buildings, but it should only be protected from arrows. Everything else should cut right through it.

[krt0143]

13 minutes ago, ShadowOfHassen said:

I should be able to do it in different ways.

 Yes, that's my complaint: I don't want to do it always in the same tired way. That's why I'm modding the game, and why I create my own scenarios. Unfortunately I can't mod the AI...

[Gurken Khan]

1 hour ago, krt0143 said:

What's "eco tech"?

Short for economy.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

1 hour ago, krt0143 said:

Anyway, thanks for the link, but that's precisely how I do not want to play... The problem is that if you can write a step-by-step instruction, you can as well automate the whole thing, create a macro, there is no point involving a human, not this human at least. I'm a creative, I want to plan, plot, scheme, but certainly not calculate...

The point is that you need a strong economy in order to afford all of your scheming here. If you find yourself 'saving up' for every tower and fortress you want, then chances are that's why the AI seems so fast to you.

I suggest you spend the first 15 minutes investing in economy so that you have enough resources and workers to carry out your plans.

[alre]

45 minutes ago, ShadowOfHassen said:

This is a problem that I've found with 0 A.D. --Real quick preface is that I'm not the best RTS player, but I think I'm pretty good, but there are some bad balances with both 0 A.D.'s AI and the game itself

I have not played it, but I've heard stories about people playing competitive World of Warcraft where they had to send EXACTLY two soldiers to collect gold, Exactly two to build and then train 10 grunts and blitz, because that's what everyone else did.

0 A.D. seems like this. OK, there are some ways in the game where you shouldn't be able to everything. (If I just pick flowers in minecraft I'm going to get myself killed really quickly) but 0 A.D. should not have a specific "way" to win. OK, you do need to shoot for wood and meat in the first level, but I should be able to do it in different ways. I should be rewarded by putting a few soldiers on metal and stone at the beginning. I shouldn't have to pour everything  I've got into soldiers, because if I don't, I get mobbed by 50 spearmen 10 minutes unto the game. Building walls would counteract the spearmen, but I'd need the resources and builders for that, and that requires more soldiers and I can't get all of that done.

How can this be addressed? Firstly, by rewarding players for branching out. My suggestion was to change the resources required by the resource gathering upgrades, so that the player, if he put people on metal, would be rewarded by making his wood soldiers get upgraded, yes you could ignore that, but now its a choice. Just getting wood and metal might allow me to get lower costs, but If I can wide balance it, my late game time will be easier.

Then in regard to rams. @Vantha's been doing more research, but in ancient times a siege ram would be murdered by a handful of men without protection. It should destroy buildings, but it should only be protected from arrows. Everything else should cut right through it.

if you reward players that do something different from current meta, you are just changing a build order with another. creating a variety of strategies takes a bit more than that.

1 hour ago, krt0143 said:

What's "eco tech"?

all the techs that improve gathering of any resource.

[ShadowOfHassen]

2 minutes ago, alre said:

if you reward players that do something different from current meta, you are just changing a build order with another. creating a variety of strategies takes a bit more than that.

Exactly, and we need to make a concious effort to try to do more than just one thing. However, I don't see how balancing the game to allow people to focus and get a blitz army/ level up the first time early or make a wide range resource gathering and research the first age slower, but the next one much faster messes anything up.

If you have any ideas for other strategies, I'd love to hear them. I don't program much but the hole game design side of developing I think is fascinating. 

[alre]

9 minutes ago, ShadowOfHassen said:

If you have any ideas for other strategies, I'd love to hear them. I don't program much but the hole game design side of developing I think is fascinating. 

agree. there is indeed some work being done in that regard, and improving variety of the game is one of the goals. right now - I'm not sure why - not much is moving, but you can partecipate to the testing and general work ig you want. what's your level (lobby ranking)?

I reccomend you to take a look at how this thread and its history: 

 

[ShadowOfHassen]

7 minutes ago, alre said:

agree. there is indeed some work being done in that regard, and improving variety of the game is one of the goals. right now - I'm not sure why - not much is moving, but you can partecipate to the testing and general work ig you want. what's your level (lobby ranking)?

I reccomend you to take a look at how this thread and its history: 

 

Thanks, I actually am waiting until A27 can be released because I want to put my resource gathering update mod there to see if people like it.