Suggestions for 0 A.D.

[hamdich]

I suggest the following Changes analyse 
                   * Acceleration should be nerfed ,
                       . units have become much slower at formation or escaping .
                       . A rush can easily fail         
                       . When big numbers units sometimes freeze for 1 seconds just because of a change of                                         direction ( left to right ) due to rotation + acceleration .          
                 
                   * New Techonlogies :
                        Add a phase 2 tech that gives archer cavs/camels ability to shoot while walking but also gives                          slower mobility less DPM for expample 1.5s , less range 45m and worse accuracy . This will                              make archer cav less affective against infantry (towers ) but better against other cav 
                        which they are already too weak against.

                   * Add siege for phase 2 :
                        Smaller siege with less Hp , less DPM and armor, reasonably less expensive than the phase 3                          ones. like rams + catapults
                        the ratios between cost/ damage  damage/armor+ hp  and training time are to be figured out                            in relation with phase 3 siege
                        having good siege at phase 2 really helps some civs and makes the game better ,faster more                          enjoable and faster -> less laggy for TGs
                        for example instead of waiting for phase 3 one will be able to get rid of a ennemy tower in                                own or border territory or even attack much earlier . it opens new world of startegies because                          if doesn't work then most likely the attcker just slowing him self

                   * Heros buildings:
                    
                        Civilisations with heros whom historically kings born in ruling family or leaders who later                                    became kings should 
                        be trained from civic-centers . 
                        all the rest of civilisations train hero from unique buildings ( generals pallace ) 
                          
                        . From civic centers : kushites , ptolemies , seleucides, persians , macedonians, hans.
                           
                        . From unique buildings : gauls , britons , romans ,mauryans, atheninians ,spartans  ,                                                                                     ,carthaginians ,iberians.
                  
                        Instead of spending long building time and ressources on expensive fortress which half of                                times no need for it but just to have a hero whom potentially will die in battle and can only be                          trained once. Thats why we see Roman or carthage or iberians heros for example so rarely                              despite thier greatness.

[man_s_our]

17 hours ago, hamdich said:

                        Add a phase 2 tech that gives archer cavs/camels ability to shoot while walking

I'm already working on this one (but the archer's firing speed and accuracy is what gets negative effect by movement speed. not the opposite) in other way.

the problem is that this needs huge edits on UnitAI and some other components. so you need patience.

[Freagarach]

17 minutes ago, man_s_our said:

I'm already working on this one (but the archer's firing speed and accuracy is what gets negative effect by movement speed. not the opposite) in other way.

the problem is that this needs huge edits on UnitAI and some other components. so you need patience.

That would be huge. ^^ If you do get it working (whilst not breaking everything ;P ), please make a patch on Phab. Also, feel free to ping me on IRC (#0ad-dev on Quakenet) if you want to discuss something (even ping when I'm not online, I follow the logs quite regularly).

[alre]

On 13/11/2023 at 10:27 AM, man_s_our said:

I'm already working on this one (but the archer's firing speed and accuracy is what gets negative effect by movement speed. not the opposite) in other way.

the problem is that this needs huge edits on UnitAI and some other components. so you need patience.

I can help with UnitAI. could never make working animations though.

[man_s_our]

17 hours ago, alre said:

I can help with UnitAI. could never make working animations though.

if you want to help debugging and fixing the issues clone this repo and use this horse template for tests.

btw. I don't think we need animations because we're going to use infantry as turrets on horses.

 

fauna_horse.xml

Edited November 15, 2023 by man_s_our

[LienRag]

On 12/11/2023 at 8:25 AM, man_s_our said:

it doesn't add micros. but adds more tactical choices.

How so ?

If units don't see their back, it means that the player has to make them constantly turn around so they don't miss anything.

A real recipe for micromanagement disaster  in my book...

[LienRag]

On 12/11/2023 at 11:12 AM, man_s_our said:

if implemented without the planned additions, then it would increase only few micros because supplies quantity is still big.

So, like in Age of Empire ? Where it actually served no gameplay purpose ?

One way that could be interesting strategically is if farms could not be regrown on the same location after they wither (the soil being exhausted).

But that's not easy to balance on so many different maps...

 

[man_s_our]

13 hours ago, LienRag said:

How so ?

If units don't see their back, it means that the player has to make them constantly turn around so they don't miss anything.

A real recipe for micromanagement disaster  in my book...

in case they were idle they'd simply be automatically looking left and right from moment to other. just like normal people do. especially when guarding.

[man_s_our]

13 hours ago, LienRag said:

So, like in Age of Empire ? Where it actually served no gameplay purpose ?

One way that could be interesting strategically is if farms could not be regrown on the same location after they wither (the soil being exhausted).

But that's not easy to balance on so many different maps...

 

whether they regrow or you rebuild them they'll consume water from groundwater or using farmers to water them. I don't know whether I'd add the fertilizers as limited resource or just make it as auras tho.

Edited November 16, 2023 by man_s_our

[man_s_our]

On 27/10/2023 at 8:29 PM, zozio32 said:

I might download that Mod! I was not aware of it.   Are you the person to ask for advice about how to do so?  

the open beta phase has started. tell me if you want to join as early tester.

Edited December 13, 2023 by man_s_our

[zozio32]

4 hours ago, man_s_our said:

the open beta phase has started. tell me if you want to join as early tester.

potentially yes.  I have uninstalled a26, and I have dev a27 running now, so I am also using the version of DE that works with a27.  The "realism mod" can work with dev a27?

Edit: you answered me in the other thread. I will try to give it a go

Edited December 13, 2023 by zozio32

[man_s_our]

2 hours ago, zozio32 said:

potentially yes.  I have uninstalled a26, and I have dev a27 running now, so I am also using the version of DE that works with a27.  The "realism mod" can work with dev a27?

Edit: you answered me in the other thread. I will try to give it a go

the mod is targeting A27. so that it may be playable when A27 is officially released.

[zozio32]

hello, I did try to lunch a match against the A.I. and the mod activated, but without much success.    Where should I put the logs so you can check what went wrong?   I am attaching them here in the mean time

interestinglog.html mainlog.html system_info.txt userreport_hwdetect.txt

 

so, some quick checks. I seems to miss the folders "tree", "rock" and "ore" in "/mods/realismod/simulation/templates/gaia/"

there is a bunch of errors as the "meat" resource is not found, but that come from the initial one on "MeatSupplies.js "   . On this point, won't we need an interface specific to this new component?

 

Edited December 13, 2023 by zozio32
added log and text

[man_s_our]

9 hours ago, zozio32 said:

hello, I did try to lunch a match against the A.I. and the mod activated, but without much success.    Where should I put the logs so you can check what went wrong?   I am attaching them here in the mean time

interestinglog.html 1.31 MB · 0 downloads mainlog.html 1.4 MB · 0 downloads system_info.txt 9.24 kB · 0 downloads userreport_hwdetect.txt 13.93 kB · 0 downloads

 

so, some quick checks. I seems to miss the folders "tree", "rock" and "ore" in "/mods/realismod/simulation/templates/gaia/"

there is a bunch of errors as the "meat" resource is not found, but that come from the initial one on "MeatSupplies.js "   . On this point, won't we need an interface specific to this new component?

 

this thread is the one meant for feedbacks and updates

[Sp00ky]

On 03/11/2023 at 12:05 PM, LienRag said:

 

2 - Defense is unbalanced : Town Centers are extremely good defenses especially in early game, which is a good thing as "zerg rushes" are imho unfun;

 

I disagree with this to some extent. People often exaggerate about rushes in these games. I feel like rushes should have a chance to succeed. In most other games a rush is a risky business. It is usually successful towards low elo player however if the player knows how to defend then the rush leaves the attacker with a huge economic disadvantage. In fact as you climb up the elo rushes become less frequent and people tend to raid instead with small amount of units.

The problem is that 0ad tcs are definitely OP and ruin a big aspect of the game, both rushes are not viable because of the sheer disadvantage of the attacker, nor raids with smaller forces if the player keeps the units close to their TC

One is that they shoot without any garrisoned unit, they have massive range and they deal a ton of damage. In AoE2 for example if you want to kill the enemy explorer you have to carefully micro your vills inside the tc losing some resource gathering time, and even then it is not a guaranteed kill. In 0AD if your explorer stumbles upon an enemy TC is dead 99% of the times with no action required by the defending player. This also hinders scouting which is very important to plan a counter to your enemy strategy (altough 0AD counters or, more accurately, lack of them deserve a whole other discussion)

I think a good starting change would be to change to make the TC do not shoot any arrow if no units are garrisoned inside, and generally nerf their range. 

Another thing that makes raiding unprofitable in 0AD is the cheap costs of units and the speed in which units are produced. In 0AD a village kill is most of the time not a big deal, another one will be spawning soon, and if the player has the tech that lets the houses spawn new villagers this is even less meaningful. This should also be tweaked if TCs are to be nerfed, both villagers and military units should take more time to train and cost more resources. That way an unsuccessful rush can be a fatal mistake because of the amount of resources invested in it.

 

[MarcusAureliu#s]

A small but helpfull improvement could be to display hotkeys in the building menues, like it is done in aoe 2 for example. I am aware that building placement hotkeys are currently done by a mod, autociv which hopefully can be integrated in the game, but this could already be implemented for unit production.

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

4 hours ago, MarcusAureliu#s said:

A small but helpfull improvement could be to display hotkeys in the building menues, like it is done in aoe 2 for example. I am aware that building placement hotkeys are currently done by a mod, autociv which hopefully can be integrated in the game, but this could already be implemented for unit production.

This would make it so much easier to build or adjust muscle memory for using hotkeys. If you forget the hotkey or simply forget to use it you'll see the little "h" on the icon and be reminded of it.

 

[Friedrich123]

Proposed changes for the fortress, additional techs and champions:

 

For most civs there is only one technology in the fortress to research: will to fight. On top of that, some may build their heroes there too. But with the upcoming changes and the effort to move hero recruitment to special buildings (i.e. ptol in alpha27), there should be another use for the fortress apart from its poor defensive capability. Therefore I propose a number of unique technologies that should be researchable inside the fortress:

These techs would be in a similar fashion like the ones in the imperial ministery (han). You will get to choose one from two mutually exclusive available techs: One has a more offensive character, the other one a defensive; i.e. Siege weapons deal 15% more damage or buildings have 25% more hp

Another set of possible technologies are: one that give a small buff in general or a big buff for a certain building/unit type; i.e. Group training time -5% for all military units or +2 pierce armour for slingers

Making these late game technologies mutually exclusive will add another layer of decision making and planning to the late game. Do I want to specialise in one unit type and risk being countered by the enemy? Do I focus on the defense as a flank in a TG or do I try doing an all out attack?

 

Additionally there should be a change to the requirements for training champions:
Some are trained in barracks others in special buildings. Take as an example the Briton Argos (swordsman) in comparison to the Maurya Visha Kanya. Both cost exactly the same, have the same training time and the same base stats. But the big difference is how you access these units:
As a Briton you just click a tech for 600 food and are able to produce your champion out of as many barracks as you like, making it cheap and easy to mass the unit.
In comparison as a Maurya you have to build a separate building costing 200 stone and 200 iron each. You have no way of effectively massing up your champions in the same way as the Briton without having to expense a small fortune.

It is normal to have 8 to 10 or even 12 barracks in the late game. Therefore to have the same production capacities as a Maurya you would have to pay between 1600 and 2400 stone and iron, being the equivalent of 2 to 3 fortresses and 20 to 30 champions worth of material (ignoring food and wood cost, as they become less important late game).

That is why I propose the implementation of one of these 3 different approaches to even out the disparity:

1.      Champions can only be build in a special building like the Harmya or Syssition

2.      Make all Champions be build in the fortress, with reduced base training time

3.      Allow Civs to upgrade their barracks or stables for a price of 150 stone and iron.
         There they may build champions at the cost of having double the training time for civil soldiers in that barrack

 

[Gurken Khan]

47 minutes ago, Friedrich123 said:

In comparison as a Maurya you have to build a separate building costing 200 stone and 200 iron each. You have no way of effectively massing up your champions in the same way as the Briton without having to expense a small fortune.

It is normal to have 8 to 10 or even 12 barracks in the late game. Therefore to have the same production capacities as a Maurya you would have to pay between 1600 and 2400 stone and iron, being the equivalent of 2 to 3 fortresses and 20 to 30 champions worth of material (ignoring food and wood cost, as they become less important late game).

It's even worse for the Han, their special building costs 300 stone and 300 iron. And since I overwhelmingly go for cav champs that hurts every time.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

I'd say make the "champ building" a standard thing. Call it the 'Academy' class building. Persia's is the Tachara, Sparta's is the Syssiton, Athens' is the Gymnasion, etc. Macedon's is the Royal Barracks. 

 

Or move Champs back to the Fortress for most civs 

[Lion.Kanzen]

I would love to have anti-siege soldiers in the fortress.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

14 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I'd say make the "champ building" a standard thing. Call it the 'Academy' class building. Persia's is the Tachara, Sparta's is the Syssiton, Athens' is the Gymnasion, etc. Macedon's is the Royal Barracks. 

 

Or move Champs back to the Fortress for most civs 

What I would suggest is this: let each civ train more 'generic' champions (those that are the same or very similar as the template) from the barracks/stable with the unlock champ tech. Then, for 1 or 2 champs for each civ, diversify them additionally and let them go in either the fort or the champ building, depending on their strength. Then the unit stats could also be adjusted if they are going to a building that is more expensive.

I would recommend this once we get enough ideas for cool unique units for each civ. I suppose the centurion, persian immortal, and the fire cav are already sufficiently unique.

[Lion.Kanzen]

2 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

What I would suggest is this: let each civ train more 'generic' champions (those that are the same or very similar as the template) from the barracks/stable with the unlock champ tech. Then, for 1 or 2 champs for each civ, diversify them additionally and let them go in either the fort or the champ building, depending on their strength. Then the unit stats could also be adjusted if they are going to a building that is more expensive

It's interesting, I imagine them as royal guards or whatever.

 

Could be called basic champion.

With a Tier Rank called bronze and And those of the special buildings called silver and gold.

[Outis]

22 hours ago, Friedrich123 said:

apart from its poor defensive capability

This should be the job of a building called fortress. It should secure an area against unprepared assaults.

[Outis]

18 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I'd say make the "champ building" a standard thing. Call it the 'Academy' class building

I propose at least one unique champ building and one unique tech and hero training building (Government center class?) for each civ.