Alpha 17 Balancing Branch

[Radagast.]

... it would be better to relate it with limits per unit type, reflecting historical numbers of units each civ had and the needed balance.

Great, I like the idea to derive the champion limit the dynamically from the current population count.

It would make defining the limits hard-coded obsolete.

Not sure about walking speed, but couldn't we define it like in real world? e.g. Arabs might have swifter horses ... cavalry without any accessories is basically x times quicker than infantry and the like.

Charging/Running:

horse: <50 miles / h

human: <30 miles / h (Bolt)

Walking:

horse: 3..4 miles / h (3.7 mi/h => 6 km/h)

human: 3.1 miles / h 5 km / h

I would love a malus + bonus depending on the terrain texutre and slope.

Having it depend on accessories' weight too would only add epicness.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_speed_of_a_horse_when_walking

http://www.howfastcan.com/a-horse-run/

Edited July 26, 2014 by Radagast.

[thamlett]

Great, I like the idea to derive the champion limit the dynamically from the current population count.

It would make defining the limits hard-coded obsolete.

Not sure about walking speed, but couldn't we define it like in real world? e.g. Arabs might have swifter horses ... cavalry without any accessories is basically x times quicker than infantry and the like.

Charging/Running:

horse: <50 miles / h

human: <30 miles / h (Bolt)

Walking:

horse: 3..4 miles / h (3.1 mi/h => 5 km/h)

human: 5 km / h

I would love a malus + bonus depending on the terrain texutre and slope.

Having it depend on accessories' weight too would only add epicness.

Right on the money, Rada

[Jagst3r21]

Have you guys even attempted playing the game at 1.25x instead of making everything move faster as default?

Have you even played this game?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Have you even played this game?

Yes. You fail to answer my question.

Edited July 27, 2014 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[auron2401]

Playing the game at 1.25x speeds up Everything, So your question is stupid and pointless. It assumes that game speed only affects movement speed. Which is the ONLY thing which has been increased.

unless you count the research which makes everything harvest faster but that costs.

Edited July 27, 2014 by auron2401

[iNcog]

I think I once played the game on faster speed and it felt more pleasant than playing on normal speed. Maybe it's because I play a starcraft a bit, but it did feel quite nice.

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

Great, I like the idea to derive the champion limit the dynamically from the current population count.

It would make defining the limits hard-coded obsolete.

Not sure about walking speed, but couldn't we define it like in real world? e.g. Arabs might have swifter horses ... cavalry without any accessories is basically x times quicker than infantry and the like.

Charging/Running:

horse: <50 miles / h

human: <30 miles / h (Bolt)

Walking:

horse: 3..4 miles / h (3.7 mi/h => 6 km/h)

human: 3.1 miles / h 5 km / h

I would love a malus + bonus depending on the terrain texutre and slope.

Having it depend on accessories' weight too would only add epicness.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_speed_of_a_horse_when_walking

http://www.howfastcan.com/a-horse-run/

Although the data may seem convincing, consider the fact that many troops would be weighed down by armor, so running would be substantially slower in their case unless the stamina simply was drained a great deal. As far as the speed increase, I personally enjoy 0 A.D.'s slower paced gameplay. This is a patch dedicated to balancing the game, so such a modification is extraneous to the mod's overarching purpose, unless there is some way this change actually does balance the game as opposed to making 0 A.D. a more feverish to play game.

[Jagst3r21]

Yes. You fail to answer my question.

Play me on Scythe's branch. I will punish you.

[zzippy]

Punish? The wise man just smiles ..

..........

Jagst3r21, iNcog, auron2401, what about hanging out in balance lobby a little more? Mostly we miss a 4th man for a decent 2v2. Btw, we created a jabber chatroom where we svn/sbb players normally hangout and arrange for matches or discuss balancing: 0adtalk@conference.jabber.ccc.de

Edited July 28, 2014 by zzippy

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Play me on Scythe's branch. I will punish you.

*sigh*

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Playing the game at 1.25x speeds up Everything, So your question is stupid and pointless. It assumes that game speed only affects movement speed. Which is the ONLY thing which has been increased.

unless you count the research which makes everything harvest faster but that costs.

I don't make such an assumption at all. I was simply asking a question. My question is in regards to the idea that the game is too slow. Only one guy seems to admit that he has have even tried it at 1.25x (iNcog).

I have to say the responses I have gotten so far in this thread have been troubling. I am a long time lurker. I was around the forums 2+ years ago under a different name ( been playing the game since alpha 1, or was it alpha 2, don't remember) and I remember this to be a much friendlier (and more productive!) place then. You have this "balance branch" run by a team member (?) with contributors challenging me to a schoolyard duel like we're in middle school instead of discussing a video game? As someone in the game industry, I seriously wonder about the methods being applied here. Is there a vision? What are the guiding principles for this branch? Will any of your changes actually make sense within the context of the game design? Have simpler solutions to balancing problems even been attempted before throwing out what seems to be a mature set of game rules?

[FeXoR]

wowgetoffyourcellphone:

I'm not entirely sure but AFAIK it was only one person rude.

In general I feel it's still a quite nice place to be.

(And without meaning to offend anyone personally: IMO as communities grow, the mood converges towards the mood of society in general.

So if this was a notably friendly (so above the average) community it will go towards a less friendly community (the average) just by becoming popular.)

For me the game stutters at normal speed already so (without having tried yet) it'd likely be unplayable for me at 1.25 times the normal speed.

(My hardware is about 10 years old though)

I'm not really sure I get the point of this "balancing branch" at all...

(If some PPL like it that's good, ofc.. but IMO it does not and should not dictate the way the project goes

If we find some nice things on the path that's great ofc.

Going toward just another fast paced/hectic RTS only won by purely/mainly offensive strategies would be a disaster though...)

Edited July 28, 2014 by FeXoR

[wraitii]

I can't vouch for scythe's intentions beyond what he said: trying to make the game more fun, more strategic. I will say from my reports that we do seem to be on slightly different pages, but we have had no real discussion in the team about gameplay, and even less consensus. The only consensus is that A16 seems broken.

As for me, I have played the game at 1x speed, at 1.5 speed, at 2x speed (at different alphas but the feel stayed similar), and I feel 2x speed is somewhat what I would want. However it gets really, really frantic. So I think simply having units move faster will give the proper impression of speed while not speeding gameplay up.

I will however ask everyone to remain civil, and absolutely refrain from vague personal attacks.

[thamlett]

FeXoR: upgrade your hardware... you will love losing your money

[iNcog]

Punish? The wise man just smiles ..

..........

Jagst3r21, iNcog, auron2401, what about hanging out in balance lobby a little more? Mostly we miss a 4th man for a decent 2v2. Btw, we created a jabber chatroom where we svn/sbb players normally hangout and arrange for matches or discuss balancing: 0adtalk@conference.jabber.ccc.de

I have little free time to speak of and I've thrown most of it into starcraft 2, I'm mostly waiting for A17 as of right now. Half of that reason is because A16 kinda sucks, the other half is because I'm not smart enough to get the balance branch working properly.

I'm looking at this balance branch and I agree with a lot of changes on paper; i think progress is being made. I'm also devoutly against team game in RTS.

I'll try to get on sometime

[tau]

Hi all,

i played the balancing branch quite a lot since the first balancing changes were made there and would like to summarize my impressions below.

Slingers getting crush damage
Very interesting change, that makes slingers more different from skirmishers, especially considering that hard counters were removed. With crush attack of 3 they were definitely op, not sure about 2; but anyway interesting.

Women train time change
I personally appreciate this return to a15 training time very much, as being both logical and more balanced.

Farms easily destructable with melee attack only
Happy to see this. Logical, and, all food eco cannot be easily destroyed with one unit type anymore.

Skirm cav params decrease
Was the most expected change that should have resolved the cav rush issue from a16. Afair, there was no cav rush prob in a15, they appeared after cav stats change. However, with some cav rush skills gained in a16, it was still possible to effectively cav rush in the balance branch or svn. But I think that in combination with other changes, like farms armor change, this stats change should resolve the cav prob.

No formations
I personally use formations very rarely but pretty sure many other players will be frustrated over this. Can't believe that this will stay this way for a17. And very curious why formations were removed. There are already various legends and rumours, would like to know what is true

Techs unlocking
Like the idea of unlocking itself, but the coefficients imo should be lowered. From my experience of playing after techs unlocking, I can say that there's still a desire to 'research everything'. When some resource tech is not researched, I start to have a real lack of this resource. And researching a tech seems to be a better solution than using a market.
On the other hand, later in game, especially on maps rich with resources, a game feels like a deathmatch.
Also would like to share a concern about farm tech available in age I. At first I was excited about it, but now I see that this makes the game less 'beautiful' from the historical point of view. Now there's no more reason to start with gathering fruits before building farms, the choice between bushes and farms depends only on a map.

Melee units cost F/W/M
No definite opinion on this yet. It became more realistic but not sure if more interesting. Again, players will have to use markets more. And less chances to predict which units an enemy will train, knowing which resources he has. Don't know if this is 'good' or 'bad', just different.

CCs have better defence
I guess this change was made because in a16, after fortresses had become stronger, in lategame this is np to destroy a cc when you have enough power to destroy a fortress. However in age I - I personally never aim to destroy a CC in age I, but spectated your games - CCs seems to be a bit too strong. I'd suggest CC stats to increase with phasing to balance this.

Rams attacking units
Had a concern that this makes rams op but after some testing I see this doesn't. However rams attacking units look weird and unrealistic. Heard that this is some kind of 'placeholder until pathfinder is fixed' (?). I hope it is; don't see this change as 'appropriate' for an alpha release.

Walkspeed change
Scared to touch this sensitive topic and won't go deep into it Generally, speed is a matter of taste. I don't see a constructive way to argue which speed is ok, fast or slow.
I would like to point out that I understand the difference between walkspeed and overall speed, however, walkspeed influences gathering speed, so the game becomes generally faster, except construction speed.
Together with eco techs changes requiring more actions in less time, this results in less controllable eco. Perhaps this is more realistic (but maybe less realistic). Anyway, when you are used to more controllable eco, this feels annoying.
Again, I consider pointless to bring any logical arguments when it is about a matter of taste. Personally I prefer a16 to the balance branch despite all a16 issues, after the speed changes were made.
I admit that sometimes I experience a prob with units slow movement and that first seconds of a game can be sort of empty. However I wouldn't like a solution for the slow movement prob to affect the game in so many ways. I would first think in the direction of implementing a run command, which is being discussed again in the Suggestions thread, so that it would increase speed only for selected group, only when a player wants it, without side-effects on eco.

Gathering capacity change
Played one game after this change. Together with walkspeed adjustment, this decreases the walkspeed change effect on eco in the very beginning of a game. Resources amount increases not only slower, but smoother Though obviously, this is not why this change was made, but to encourage a player to research wheelbarrow techs. Probably interesting, but together with other changes, one more thing to do in less time.
Heard also that this change aims to prevent 'cav-based eco'. If so, then the suggestion to increase cav costs (which I disliked as a possible solution for cav rush prob) seems to be more elegant.

In general, I like most of the military changes in the branch, though expected them to be more 'localized', aiming at specific a16 issues. Now it is more rebalancing than balancing. And I don't understand why to change eco. Eco was balanced imo, now have a fear that it will become worse.

[WhiteTreePaladin]

The issue with balancing that I've noticed is that what experienced players consider balanced is often not really that fun for casual players, and what casual players like is often the exact opposite of what experienced players want. It's hard enough to balance for one group, but balancing for both at the same time is very difficult.

Edited August 7, 2014 by WhiteTreePaladin

[wraitii]

Gathering capacity change

Played one game after this change. Together with walkspeed adjustment, this decreases the walkspeed change effect on eco in the very beginning of a game. Resources amount increases not only slower, but smoother Though obviously, this is not why this change was made, but to encourage a player to research wheelbarrow techs. Probably interesting, but together with other changes, one more thing to do in less time.

It's actually totally why this change was made. I complained to scythe that in the early game gathering wasn't smooth enough, and he agreed. Wheelbarrow techs are an afterthought that give an opportunity to reduce eco-microing in the mid-late game.

You seem to think on the whole that A16 allowed you to do everything, whereas in the balance branch you cannot research/train/build everything in a game, is this right?

WhiteTreePaladin: there is no such thing as balancing for inexperienced players.

[niektb]

Wriatti, casual gamers are not necessarily inexperienced.

Casual gamers are the type of players that like to play at a mediocre speed with longer games where not every second counts.

Being forced to enter a certain specialist branch (not Eco / military, but rather something like light infantry / heavy infantry) is a cool way to create a replay value. (For casual gamers it is a fun aspect IMO)

Edited August 7, 2014 by niektb

[wraitii]

niektb: There is no such thing as balancing for a casual player either. This is called playing SP. And making SP fun isn't called "balancing".

[niektb]

You could BTW distinguish a third player group: Core Gamers. They fall between Casual and Competitive.

Wriatii: not entirely true, I've played more than once lengthy MP games (Although I wouldn't call these neither casual nor competitive). I could recall a game that lasted over 7 hours in Empire Earth in a 2v2 match. Unfortunately we encountered a bug which made the game crash (even though we saved and reloaded the game)

[niektb]

Or as one put (over on another forum):

I would think it is better for an RTS game to have its basic casual elements to provide a Fun-Loving experience in thinking, processing, analytical skill development and execution of plans.

This means that even with the most basic knowledge gained from a single tutorial, a player can manage against an opponent 90% of the time regardless of build and skill level.

However, there should be elements of top-tier plays which involves micro-management, and Goo'd management to distinguish skilled players from casual gamers. This distinguishing factor should take form of execution of strategies - Its hard to explain it, but you will understand when you are able to see this characteristic.

[tau]

It's actually totally why this change was made. I complained to scythe that in the early game gathering wasn't smooth enough, and he agreed. Wheelbarrow techs are an afterthought that give an opportunity to reduce eco-microing in the mid-late game.

I meant that this wasn't done to slower gathering in the early game.

You seem to think on the whole that A16 allowed you to do everything, whereas in the balance branch you cannot research/train/build everything in a game, is this right?

In short, no, and i have no clue what in my post could give you this impression.

If speaking about researching, i see that the balance branch aims to force players to choose some tech strategies instead of researching all techs (that usually happens in a16) and consider this a good initiative. However, 'researching everything' is still possible in the branch, though has become harder. (I am aware that this is not the final version of techs and other techs are to be added.)

For example, I continue to research many gathering techs:

1) because I can,

2) because they make a really huge difference,

3) because alternatives (trading or merchandising) are more micro and less fun.

As a result, on many of the maps I can have lots of resources and it starts to feel like a deathmatch. This is why I suggested to decrease the coefficients.

As for training/building everything, I am a little bit lost how to comment on this, I don't have such desires And which exactly change is supposed to prevent a player from this?

[scythetwirler]

I meant that this wasn't done to slower gathering in the early game.

In short, no, and i have no clue what in my post could give you this impression.

If speaking about researching, i see that the balance branch aims to force players to choose some tech strategies instead of researching all techs (that usually happens in a16) and consider this a good initiative. However, 'researching everything' is still possible in the branch, though has become harder. (I am aware that this is not the final version of techs and other techs are to be added.)

For example, I continue to research many gathering techs:

1) because I can,

2) because they make a really huge difference,

3) because alternatives (trading or merchandising) are more micro and less fun.

As a result, on many of the maps I can have lots of resources and it starts to feel like a deathmatch. This is why I suggested to decrease the coefficients.

As for training/building everything, I am a little bit lost how to comment on this, I don't have such desires And which exactly change is supposed to prevent a player from this?

Techs are not done yet (rather far from being done). Notably, the blacksmith techs will be a lot more expensive (probably in the ballpark of 1k of two or three resources in town phase and 1.5k for the extensions in city). The only techs that have undergone change so far are the gathering techs.

[WhiteTreePaladin]

WhiteTreePaladin: there is no such thing as balancing for inexperienced players.

I would disagree, although the focus changes to what makes the game fun, rather than what is fair. It is more like balancing colors in a painting rather than weights on a scale. Having some imbalances wouldn't affect a casual player's strategy all that much, but could absolutely ruin a match for experienced players who aim to take advantage of every possible opportunity. Unfortunately, I've seen fun features in other games completely removed or "nerfed" to the point of extinction simply because experience players "abused" them.

Here is a fictional scenario just provided as an example:

Say siege towers are used by casual players to drop their units on the other sides of walls, while experienced players only use them as arrow towers on a battle field. It's determined that siege towers in the hands of experience players are just too powerful, so their defense is weakened so that they are easier to destroy. This is done very carefully with testing and the result pleases the experience players who feel that they are neither too powerful nor too weak. However, an unintended side effect of this change is that the siege towers are generally not strong enough to survive all the way through a battlefield and make it to an enemy's walls...

I just wanted to make a point that we should take every effort to make sure that the final game is actually fun and not lose that during the process of balancing for experienced players. I'm not at all implying that anyone would intentionally want to make the game less fun, just that it can happen by accident.

Edited August 8, 2014 by WhiteTreePaladin