wowgetoffyourcellphone's gameplay design

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Indeed, a Stables/Barracks split could be possible. I might throw it in there.

 

For your last point. I think maybe battalion formations could get more organized as the units promote to new ranks. Basic level troops their lines would be kind off messy, while Elite and Champion battalions would have laser-straight lines and files.

[DarcReaver]

It would be logical to have civs that require multiple military buildings and other civs which start with a generic barracks that trains all unit types. Take AoM as a reference. Either specialized hardcounter units in a single building or multiple different soft counter units in multiple barracks types. Creates gameplay diversity.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

6 hours ago, DarcReaver said:

It would be logical to have civs that require multiple military buildings and other civs which start with a generic barracks that trains all unit types. Take AoM as a reference. Either specialized hardcounter units in a single building or multiple different soft counter units in multiple barracks types. Creates gameplay diversity.

It's true. I like how the Persians have a barracks and stable, while the Spartans have a barracks and military mess hall, and further the Romans only have a barracks. Maybe just have a basic rule than any civ with more than 2 cavalry types is to receive a stable building. I can't imagine forcing a stable building into the Spartan civ building roster.

 

Side note: About AOM, I never understood the Barracks and Counter-Barracks for the Atlanteans. Why would you ever train any barracks units when your Counter-Barracks units hard counter everything? Especially if you're a good twitch gamer, microer, just always train the hard counter units. But I was never a fan of the Atlanteans. Zeus4lyfe.

Edited April 1, 2017 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Lion.Kanzen]

Counter barrack can be nice for Imperial Romans and their auxiliary.

[DarcReaver]

On 1.4.2017 at 10:51 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

Counter barrack can be nice for Imperial Romans and their auxiliary.

For example, yes.

On 1.4.2017 at 9:03 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

It's true. I like how the Persians have a barracks and stable, while the Spartans have a barracks and military mess hall, and further the Romans only have a barracks. Maybe just have a basic rule than any civ with more than 2 cavalry types is to receive a stable building. I can't imagine forcing a stable building into the Spartan civ building roster.

 

Side note: About AOM, I never understood the Barracks and Counter-Barracks for the Atlanteans. Why would you ever train any barracks units when your Counter-Barracks units hard counter everything? Especially if you're a good twitch gamer, microer, just always train the hard counter units. But I was never a fan of the Atlanteans. Zeus4lyfe.

There are several military buildings for civs afterall, Stoas, Barracks etc. The military buildings should be tied to the faction type. I.e. Hellenes use barracks and counter barracks, Romans use barracks only, other cives use counter barracks and stable etc.

[Lion.Kanzen]

So this time to separate the civil building and military.

the soldiers can build both so current interface barely it have room for more icons.

 

I have this problem with Egyptians in Aristeia. I mean not sure @wowgetoffyourcellphone Your thoughts  about this matter.

[Servo]

The only thing I don't like is the battalion. You can train in battalions or batches but units should operate individually. Formations should make up for battalion. Battalion is one of my dislike in RoN but it adds to gameplay.

Yeah Rise of Nations has very good gameplay mechanics. My favorite game before I come across 0AD. AI's have better intelligence. Attrition, roads, limited caravan, supply wagon, border push, university, upgrade buildings, scouts, spies, leader or generals abilities. 

So many things can be done without much headaches but could make the game more enjoyable. 

I hope you focus more on single player mode because imo this game becomes dull when all the trees and animals die. Like in AoE2 when AI destroys the environment the game become so boring. 

[Lion.Kanzen]

Quote

I hope you focus more on single player mode because imo this game becomes dull when all the trees and animals die. Like in AoE2 when AI destroys the environment the game become so boring. 

The men destroy their enviroment. Many cultures collapses because this.

 

you can suggest a mechanic from EE1 where animal reproduces but never reach more than a number.

but with forest isn't the same deal, this depends of many biome factors. 

Some Mayan cultures for example destroyed their enviroment and their Fields ( Milpa). 

Egyptian haven't enogh wood so they commerce wood for gold with Libanese cultures.

 

 

Edited April 5, 2017 by Lion.Kanzen

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

8 hours ago, Servo said:

The only thing I don't like is the battalion. You can train in battalions or batches but units should operate individually. Formations should make up for battalion. Battalion is one of my dislike in RoN but it adds to gameplay.

Yeah Rise of Nations has very good gameplay mechanics. My favorite game before I come across 0AD. AI's have better intelligence. Attrition, roads, limited caravan, supply wagon, border push, university, upgrade buildings, scouts, spies, leader or generals abilities. 

So many things can be done without much headaches but could make the game more enjoyable. 

I hope you focus more on single player mode because imo this game becomes dull when all the trees and animals die. Like in AoE2 when AI destroys the environment the game become so boring. 

Of course the team can do whatever they want to with my proposal: include some of the ideas or ignore all of them completely. However, I find the battalions to be crucial to the combat mechanic, so much so that I'd rather they just ignore my whole proposal if they don't implement battalions. Soldiers don't fight as individuals in ancient combat. It's just not done. Even in the "age of heroes" with "single combat", the bulk of the battle was completed by formations of soldiers. If you want combat with individuals making great big choices for themselves, then don't make a strategy game based on ancient combat, especially not based on Romans and Greeks who prided themselves in their formation combat! That's just my PoV. 

[Servo]

My point of having units created in battalions is that a unit can't detach from it. If the battalion is almost wiped out some remnants could go back and heal then regenerate into the same battalion? If this is so then it's not Real. In BFME 2 I like it in such a manner that I could produce more units despite population capped and units can be coupled with ease because you produce only 5 units. But in RoN it's not because the 3 units count as one even if two units out of 3 died. 

When I play 0AD I make sure that I have 10 units of each citizen soldiers that can be fully promoted so they can operate in battalion formations. I produce battalions of champions but guess what does the AI fight in battalions? In multiplayer the players play to win in many ways real battle between huge armies doesn't occur unless there will have mutual agreement as to when and where battle occurs. Or in scenarios where players are to follow specific instructions.  But when the battle commences units scatter all over the place. In real battle it's the same units could end up fighting individually. 

In 0AD when I put my units in formations it's so hard to extricate wounded units if they are attached or it's very hard to maneuver when marching in tight spaces. I hope a hot key can be provided to deselect the heavily wounded units from a group like the one in RoN which i select all units then I think press "alt-number" and heavily wounded units are highlighted. 

[Lion.Kanzen]

The battalion thing is better How Rise and Fall CaTW manages this.

the battalion were intelligent if units were idle that tend to form battalions.

they can disband from battalion.

[DarcReaver]

2 hours ago, Servo said:

My point of having units created in battalions is that a unit can't detach from it. If the battalion is almost wiped out some remnants could go back and heal then regenerate into the same battalion? If this is so then it's not Real. In BFME 2 I like it in such a manner that I could produce more units despite population capped and units can be coupled with ease because you produce only 5 units. But in RoN it's not because the 3 units count as one even if two units out of 3 died. 

When I play 0AD I make sure that I have 10 units of each citizen soldiers that can be fully promoted so they can operate in battalion formations. I produce battalions of champions but guess what does the AI fight in battalions? In multiplayer the players play to win in many ways real battle between huge armies doesn't occur unless there will have mutual agreement as to when and where battle occurs. Or in scenarios where players are to follow specific instructions.  But when the battle commences units scatter all over the place. In real battle it's the same units could end up fighting individually. 

In 0AD when I put my units in formations it's so hard to extricate wounded units if they are attached or it's very hard to maneuver when marching in tight spaces. I hope a hot key can be provided to deselect the heavily wounded units from a group like the one in RoN which i select all units then I think press "alt-number" and heavily wounded units are highlighted. 

So... what is the problem to add a population popcap to the soldiers? Battalions can of course have variable pop cap. Each soldier counts towards it, with an individual value. 

[Servo]

@DarcReaver I have no problem with pop cap in fact I like it. I even reduce my pop cap whenever possible just to find a better AI behavior(note: I play single player mostly except RoN).

What I'm pointing out is battalion production is ok but units can individually detacth and it's normal and real. I found BFME 2 as a better application of an undetached battalion because I think I was able to make more units than the pop cap(I guess I can make 260/200) and AI behavior is nice too but not real. Its fine too with games concentrating singly/more on military strategy. But with economic activity there are so many strategy involved and creating a disciplined army are almost possible only in the beginning of aggression and when the opponent is neutralized and you relax. 

[DarcReaver]

21 minutes ago, Servo said:

@DarcReaver I have no problem with pop cap in fact I like it. I even reduce my pop cap whenever possible just to find a better AI behavior(note: I play single player mostly except RoN).

What I'm pointing out is battalion production is ok but units can individually detacth and it's normal and real. I found BFME 2 as a better application of an undetached battalion because I think I was able to make more units than the pop cap(I guess I can make 260/200) and AI behavior is nice too but not real. Its fine too with games concentrating singly/more on military strategy. But with economic activity there are so many strategy involved and creating a disciplined army are almost possible only in the beginning of aggression and when the opponent is neutralized and you relax. 

Pop cap over maximum depends on the game code. If the pop is used from the point when the unit training starts it's harder to create situations where the pop cap is above its maximum.

Overall I don't get your point.  AI has nothing to do with either pop cap or battalions itself. The last paragaph doesn't make any sense either. I think you're mixing several independant aspects which do not belong together.

Edited April 6, 2017 by DarcReaver

[Servo]

AI has something to do with my post because as I said I mostly play single player mode. I don't know what code are you talking about but game developer should have idea how a player can go beyond a maximum limit like in the case of BFME. It's very simple and only needs a common sense.  

My game or how I play my game is influenced by the AI behavior. It's like as simple as if I play against easy AI what will I get? Will I enjoy? If so I go to hardest, will I enjoy? If not I will think of what makes me enjoy. Maybe against 3 hardest AI will I enjoy? Can I succeed? Did I achieve what I like the game to go to? Did I protect the trees from being cut in my area? Did I preserve more animals, did I protect the apple tree of not getting harvested. Did I make my units promoted? Did I have zero losses against 3 hardest AI? Did I cheat?! Is there a cheat?! These are things I try to enjoy playing 0AD.

There are things that I like to enjoy from RTS PC games and so far 0AD is the best I can have in playing against AI but this game has more potential to be more enjoyable and I guess making units in battalions is going to make the game unreal.

why I play the game heavily it's because of unit promotions, individual units, walls, and quite real historical civilization. I can understand that units that comes out of the barracks should be in battalions but make it more realistic. Don't make this units become gay. Every man should be given a chance to mingle with a woman.

As Leo Karsen said disband. Yeah I saw this in some games like Stronghold you can have battalions but every unit in a battalion can be ordered individually, either disband or raid etc. Detach is a simple word and also applied in military terms. Btw when I said disciplined army I'm referring to a battalion. 

[Sundiata]

I think Servo definitely has a point, in making sure that people who play predominantly in single player should be able to get the most out of the game. Sometimes there seems to be an unhealthy infatuation with the online game. This obsession with making everything as streamlined and competitive as possible might actually lead to limiting options, and taking away enjoyable content from the mass of offline players who enjoy the freedom to take the game where-ever they want to take it. The game in itself is very moddable for a modder, but let's not forget the possibilities of "in game" modding. The ability to customize your civ the way you like it, and I think this includes the choice between battalions, and no battalions, and the ability to add or subtract individual units from these battalions. The way the AI will make use of these new features and how players adapt to this is indeed quite relevant (every aspect of the game is interconnected with every other aspect of the game).  

Edited April 6, 2017 by Sundiata

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<Entity parent="template_entity_unit_battalion">
  <Battalion>
    <LineUnit>units/athen_infantry_spearman_b.xml</LineUnit>
    <NumberOfUnits>24</NumberOfUnits>
    <SpecialUnits>
      <StandardBearer>units/athen_infantry_standardbearer.xml</StandardBearer>
      <Officer>units/athen_infantry_spearman_officer.xml</Officer>
      <NoiseMaker>units/athen_infantry_noise_maker.xml</NoiseMaker>
      <Healer/>
    </SpecialUnits>
    <Directional/>
    <Permanent>true</Permanent>
  </Battalion>
  <Cost>
    <Population>10</Population>
    <PopulationDivisible>true</PopulationDivisible>
    <BuildTime>60</BuildTime>
    <Resources>
      <food>500</food>
      <wood>400</wood>
      <stone>0</stone>
      <iron>0</iron>
      <coin>0</coin>
      <glory>0</glory>
    </Resources>
  </Cost>
  <Health>
    <RegenSoldierRate>10</RegenSoldierRate>
  </Health>
  <Identity>
    <GenericName>Athenian Hoplites</GenericName>
    <Formations datatype="tokens">
	  formations/battle_line
	  formations/column
    </Formations>
    <FormationModifiers datatype="tokens">
	  formations/modifiers/close_order
	  formations/modifiers/open_order
	  formations/modifiers/locked_shields
    </FormationModifiers>
  </Identity>
  <Looter/>
  
  ...
  
</Entity>

 

So, there would still be "single soldiers" in the game, easy for modding or modes, or scenarios. The battalion entity simple calls and places these soldiers into the battalion, what you train is the battalion template in a standard match.

Edited April 7, 2017 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

5 hours ago, Sundiata said:

I think Servo definitely has a point, in making sure that people who play predominantly in single player should be able to get the most out of the game. Sometimes there seems to be an unhealthy infatuation with the online game. This obsession with making everything as streamlined and competitive as possible might actually lead to limiting options, and taking away enjoyable content from the mass of offline players who enjoy the freedom to take the game where-ever they want to take it. The game in itself is very moddable for a modder, but let's not forget the possibilities of "in game" modding. The ability to customize your civ the way you like it, and I think this includes the choice between battalions, and no battalions, and the ability to add or subtract individual units from these battalions. The way the AI will make use of these new features and how players adapt to this is indeed quite relevant (every aspect of the game is interconnected with every other aspect of the game).  

IMHO, a gameplay design that tries to make every player happy will likely fail to be a coherent gameplay design.

[Servo]

@wowgetoffyourcellphoneIt's not about satisfying individual it's about having a real and justifiable intent to do better. 

 You train battalion, you lost unit/units in a battalion then you garrison or heal it and the units came back alive is that real?!  Another magic game? What is your intent? Well you can Mod it but I hope the developers won't go this way. The game has a very strong fundamentals already in terms of military. Only little tweaks are needed in military like barracks produce only in "battalion batches", stable(horses) and unit balancing. 

The game IMO needs more civic, economic and structural mechanics improvement. 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Lol dude units pop out the front  of buildings after being "trained" for 10 seconds. Magic!!! Lol

[Servo]

I don't think you understand my point while most others do. 

[DarcReaver]

57 minutes ago, Servo said:

I don't think you understand my point while most others do. 

He actually sums the point up pretty well. Reinforcing troops can be accomplished in many ways. Either automatically when nearby a barracks, or in owned territory. Alternatively for resources with a timer and so on. This doesn't really have to do with logics, it only depends on how much effort is put in the reinforcement mechanism coding.

I'd suggest you actually look how battalion gameplay concepts are realized in other games.

Edited April 7, 2017 by DarcReaver

[Servo]

Ok I give you a situation. 

You train 1 battalion (say 20 units). Assuming you have 100 pop cap you can only build 4 more battalions. I don't know how you gonnna make the mechanics but I assume the battalion has only one HP and for every unit in that battalion dies the HP reduces. Assuming you won the battle or you pullback with couple member units left in that battalion you decided to heal them will it come back to 20 units? Does the monk or priest pray that those who died in the battle comes back to life again?!

if assuming you don't want to heal or there will be no healing mechanism you want to reinforce with any other units then your new battalion becomes ragtag! If you want to reinforce with the same type of unit then if you produce another battalion because maybe you like the type then you will have a battalion consisting of 30 units.  I'm confused what's the mechanics of you battalion thing. 

So how? explain to me how your battalion style works. I played BFME and maybe it has the same mechanics. I like BFME but I want more real games. No fantasy. No magic or any not real possibility.

If my guess is correct and healing back to original numbers is allowed then maybe I can produce 270 population despite having 200 pop cap if I'm lucky to neutralize my opponent and toy with him all the way until he gets bored and surrender. 

 

 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

One can easily foresee a mechanic where if the reinforcement is automatic then it happens up til pop cap is reached. 

[Servo]

So if I have maximum pop cap then I go to battle with 3 battalions consisting of 20 units each then I lost 10 units each per battalion I am not allowed to make any more units? Are we going to wait until divine intervention comes and those dead units come alive? Is that what you mean?