Packing and Unpacking Rams and Siege Towers

[aeonios]

52 minutes ago, borg- said:

In my experience, hard counter work better.

I'm working on a mod that overhauls game mechanics.  Hard counters and role-based balance are a major part of that.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Again, Counter must come back. "los counters deben regresar" and Carthage Delenda Est!

Thanks nescio for correct my word s.

[aeonios]

3 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Again, Counter must come back. "los counters deben regresar" and Carthage Delenda Est!

Thanks nescio for correct my word s.

One thing I quickly noticed when reviewing the existing civs was that a lot of our civs have extremely thin unit rosters. Like sele, which has exactly 3 infantry units and 2 cavalry. How are you supposed to create an RPS balance system with only 5 units, most of which aren't even counters to each other? Some civs are ok but for a lot them there's just not enough there to work with.

[Stan`]

I guess the reason behind sele is that it's a very recent civ which unlike Kushites was included before being finished

See DE for more units ideas.

also see the respective design document

[fatherbushido]

6 hours ago, aeonios said:

One thing I quickly noticed when reviewing the existing civs was that a lot of our civs have extremely thin unit rosters. Like sele, which has exactly 3 infantry units and 2 cavalry. How are you supposed to create an RPS balance system with only 5 units, most of which aren't even counters to each other? Some civs are ok but for a lot them there's just not enough there to work with. 

Last time, I checked, there were a lot more units for sele (but perhaps the discussion is about a 'mod' or things have changed since).

Edited June 7, 2018 by fatherbushido

[Nescio]

6 hours ago, aeonios said:

One thing I quickly noticed when reviewing the existing civs was that a lot of our civs have extremely thin unit rosters. Like sele, which has exactly 3 infantry units and 2 cavalry. How are you supposed to create an RPS balance system with only 5 units, most of which aren't even counters to each other? Some civs are ok but for a lot them there's just not enough there to work with.

5 hours ago, stanislas69 said:

I guess the reason behind sele is that it's a very recent civ which unlike Kushites was included before being finished

See DE for more units ideas.

also see the respective design document

5 minutes ago, fatherbushido said:

Last time, I checked, there were a lot more units for sele (but perhaps the discussion is not about a 'mod' or things have changed since).

In both A22 and A23 the Seleucids have the following unit roster:

• barracks: infantry spearman, infantry pikeman, infantry javelinist, and cavalry javelinist (all village phase) and horse archer (town phase)
• military colony: infantry swordsman, infantry archer, cavalry spearman (all town phase mercenaries)
• fortress: infantry pikeman, infantry swordsman, cavalry spearman, chariot, and war elephant (all city phase champions) and stone thrower and siege tower (both city phase siege engines)

They have no battering rams, bolt shooters, infantry slingers, or cavalry swordsmen, however, the game would be a bit boring if all civilizations would have a fully complete unit roster.

 

[Nescio]

On 6/6/2018 at 6:15 PM, Loki1950 said:

He most likely learned to use a keyboard with a typewriter remember those two spaces after a sentence was the standard for over fifty years it's only with the advent of word processing that it changed as for being easier to read all the formal research says there is no real difference in either speed or comprehension.

Enjoy the Choice  

Lack of interpunction is also slightly unpleasant (I didn't write "difficult", mind) to read

Also, "the" standard is relative; I have dozens of 20th C books and even a few from the 19th C, however, I just checked, none of them is typeset with two spaces after a full stop. On the other hand, typewriting is a category somewhere in between manuscripts and printed media; yours is an interesting suggestion.

18 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:

Not precisely: I learned to type with a system rather reminiscent of that idea.  Typing without two-spaces seems alien to me, but I'm okay with seeing other people do it.  Sorry if I caused anyone distress through my spacing tendencies; that is not at all my intentions and I express my humblest apologies possible without being insincere.   

There is no need to apologize.

You did not cause distress.

At least not to me.

I was just curious.

Therefore I asked.

To me, using more than one space suggests sentences do not belong together.

As if they all could have been in separate paragraphs.

Like this.

It's not difficult to read.

But it's unusual.

Therefore it catches the eye.

And somewhat distracted me from the words itself.

Unconventional typesetting can have that effect.

Anyway, it might just be me.

Thank you for your reply.

[aeonios]

6 hours ago, Nescio said:

n both A22 and A23 the Seleucids have the following unit roster:

• barracks: infantry spearman, infantry pikeman, infantry javelinist, and cavalry javelinist (all village phase) and horse archer (town phase)
• military colony: infantry swordsman, infantry archer, cavalry spearman (all town phase mercenaries)
• fortress: infantry pikeman, infantry swordsman, cavalry spearman, chariot, and war elephant (all city phase champions) and stone thrower and siege tower (both city phase siege engines)

They have no battering rams, bolt shooters, infantry slingers, or cavalry swordsmen, however, the game would be a bit boring if all civilizations would have a fully complete unit roster.

Eh, well that's true but I'm only counting blue units, not mercs and champions. Mercs and champions can't be built in village phase and it wouldn't make sense to allow for it either. It's pretty lame to force an upgrade to town just because there are no units available in village. In AoK where there were 3 age upgrades and the first one was cheap that might make sense, but we only have 2 age upgrades so cutting corners for any phase is bad. All the civs in AoK were basically equal in terms of unit rosters in dark age, not so much in 0ad.

Of course I'm not saying that every civ needs to have every unit, but they do at least need basic counters for infantry and cav.

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

Keep in mind that many of the reasons for the lack of viable strategies is that no major work has been done to allow each civilisation to have possible strategies for a number of different situations like turtling, booming, or rushing in any way that seems unique to that civilisation.  Until each civilisation can execute any of these to some degree of success (Sparta, for instance would have a difficult time with the first one), the unique unit rosters serves more as a handicap to a good multiplayer experience unfortunately.  

As is, I think that it's important to think of 0 A.D. on its own terms.  In games such as starcraft, the rosters are so radically different, yet each is capable of interesting early, mid, and late-game options.  While 0 A.D. does not have to and probably cannot achieve that degree of balance, each civilisation needs a similar vision in its design to effectively deliver a balanced yet varied game experience.

[Servo]

I/we may go off topic but I guess it’s fine as new threads makes more engagement easier. 

Balancing nor counters are not really too effective to resolve or to make the game better. 

Players can adjust to any unbalance and imbalances as well. The settings have so much flexibility to accommodate and resolve issues and still go for a game.  Since AI is also predictable it negates imbalances when playing SP. 

Counters? Humnn it’s hard to tell as I’m not historian but I could hardly imagine any past ancient or medieval battles that you can say they employ counters. 

I think there is a need to change and try a gameplay that focuses on battle using melee units which are the most prevalent way of fighting or warfare during those times if I’m not mistaken. Though it’s possible that there is a range vs range skirmishes but friendly hits are being avoided. Right now most players are using the range units as the main unit/s major battles and even minor skirmishes.

Most decent players know how to counter sieges(as shown in my posted A23 replays) but they are not the majority of players in either MP or SP. A nerf on capture and speed is just fine.

 

[greedisgood500]

On 6/8/2018 at 9:56 AM, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:

Keep in mind that many of the reasons for the lack of viable strategies is that no major work has been done to allow each civilisation to have possible strategies for a number of different situations like turtling, booming, or rushing in any way that seems unique to that civilisation.  Until each civilisation can execute any of these to some degree of success (Sparta, for instance would have a difficult time with the first one), the unique unit rosters serves more as a handicap to a good multiplayer experience unfortunately.  

As is, I think that it's important to think of 0 A.D. on its own terms.  In games such as starcraft, the rosters are so radically different, yet each is capable of interesting early, mid, and late-game options.  While 0 A.D. does not have to and probably cannot achieve that degree of balance, each civilisation needs a similar vision in its design to effectively deliver a balanced yet varied game experience.

I also feel that we not need to 100% balance to a starcraft level ..
0ad seem more focus on history-lize each race,which making total balance not possible(you can make a fairly balance game in theroy like a startcarft game since everything is fiction)

an all race viable should be the goal for balancing:every race should usable in MP/SP,it just in some case you really fighting a lower chance to victory due to it weakness is amplify by the map setting etc
for a sparta since he really cannot wall up  but he got super offensive ,an booming-rushing should be an wild card option for sparta who choose to turtling(focus on econ and getting a much stronger offensive rush/aggressive move later on (a slower timing then rushing but not so late as tech turtle) what your goal as turtle is reach a better late game position,thus getting a booming(this game worker can fight!) sparta with some wood wall and a careful attack timing seem to be the equivalent of turtle.

If a race is not pickable in 1v1 it might be indicating some problem.However,I think if any race is not pickable in a 2v2 game it will be 100% too weak /not balance,since you can cover weakness in a team game,if some race still not pickable in those game it mean there an better option out there and that race is an minor race,such thing is not our goal i guess.

btw is Iberians the turtle race?I find Mauryans is more turtle early game since their wall only cost wood(no siege weapon....X.X)

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

The point I was making was not that things need to be totally balanced.  Rather, I was arguing that each civilisation should have a means doing a specific strategy (e.g. turtling, booming, and rushing.).  These do not need to be practised in the exact same way, yet it should be possible to do any of these options even if one might be easier to do for a specific civ.