Borg Mod Documentation Project

[StopKillingMe]

This will be a project to carefully document with as much detail as possible what is being changed in the Borg gameplay Mod offered for download on mod.io

New Balance. New Technology Trees. New Bonus. New Auras. New Units. New Buildings and much more.  All of these changes need to be enumerated and tracked, as this mod or parts of it may end up being rolled into a future release of 0ad Alpha (vanilla).  This is being done so that current vanilla 0ad players can make informed decisions about how to adapt current strategy to these significant changes should any or all of these changes make it into the next or some subsequent Alpha release.

The approach will be, first, to communicate the changes from the actual experience of playing the Mod against the AI, to second, loading the mod into the Eclipse IDE and finding the actual changes that are being made and clearly enumerating what they are.  For the purposes of clarity, I will as much as possible list what the current stat of a unit or tech is in the current release, and then what the new values are in the mod.  This will give the players complete transparency on the changes.

Phase One:  Apparent Changes from actual GamePlay

Test One - Britons against the AI on Oasis

1. CC has been changed - cannot train citizen soldiers, only women. (need to verify if this is the same for all civs now)

Concerns: Training male unit types in the CC was not the same for each civ - so this is a very significant change that is effecting each civ in a non-uniform way.  Must now build three different buildings to get the same type of units out that were available in the CC before this change.  Barracks produce Melee units, Archery Range produces ranged units, Stable produces Cav units.  Please note that all three of these unit types were previously able to be produced by the CC.

2. Two new techs in CC - "Siege Rations" and "Peasant Laborers" ( will need to find and enumerate in IDE) & (need to verify if this is the same for all civs in game)

 - "Siege Rations" described in game as "+5 Health for all organic units" cost is 500 food time is 20 seconds

-  "Peasant Laborers"  described in game as -10% build time for all structures cost is 100 food time is 20 seconds

Concerns:  Do all civs build structures at the same speed?  If not, if the civs that build structures at a faster speed research "Peasant Laborers" early in the build order, they will now have a massive advantage over those that don't and have slower build times.  (need more data)

3,  Wardog Kennel now build-able in Age 1

Concerns: This gives what is already considered an OP civ in vanilla the ability to harass early resource gathering of opponents.  5 war dogs plus the starting dog for Brits is a significant capability.  The cost for these dogs is only food, women have a bonus for gathering food.  Not really sure why this is being moved from Age 2 to Age 1.

Test Two - Persians against the AI on Oasis

1. Persian stables now the same as stables for all other civs- there was a differentiation in a24, where as - all other civs built barracks only, but Persians could build both barracks and stables.

Concerns:  Unique attribute of the Persian civ has been affected, perhaps unintentionally.  (need more data)

Test Three - Seleucids vs AI on Oasis

1.  Elephant Stables can now be built to produce elephants.  There is no limit on the amount of these stables that can be built.  Elephant Stables significantly cheaper and faster to produce than Fort.

Concerns:  

The ability to make Elephant Stables is a unique Mauryan tech in a24, giving this to other civs negates that unique tech.  The "Elephant Stables" are significantly cheaper to make than the Fort (in a24, Seleucids must build a fort to train Elephants), and forts are limited to 10.  This means Seleucids can now produce more elephants much faster (this needs much more investigation, will be testing the addition of Elephant Stables extensively in the coming days) - (need to carefully investigate all elephant producing civs in both a24 and borgmod)

(to be updated as I make progress)

Edited June 12, 2019 by StopKillingMe

[Lion.Kanzen]

wrong forum.

Borg's mod isn't related with CoM.

[borg-]

@feneur please, this is already getting ridiculous. lul

[StopKillingMe]

"0 A.D. is released as open source: you can freely use, copy, modify and
distribute the game's source code and data files, as long as you include
attribution to Wildfire Games and let anyone freely modify and distribute any
of your own modifications to the game's files."

I am not doing anything that the 0ad license does not allow me to do.  You do not have a right to complain about this.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

1 hour ago, StopKillingMe said:

"0 A.D. is released as open source: you can freely use, copy, modify and
distribute the game's source code and data files, as long as you include
attribution to Wildfire Games and let anyone freely modify and distribute any
of your own modifications to the game's files."

I am not doing anything that the 0ad license does not allow me to do.  You do not have a right to complain about this.

Do me next! 

[StopKillingMe]

I will be as thorough as possible, making sure I get everything listed out.  And please feel free to move this thread if it is posted in the wrong place.

Edited June 12, 2019 by StopKillingMe

[elexis]

The software license relates to redistributing possibly modified copies, the implicit or explicit usage rules enforced by moderators determine what conduct is permissible on the service.

Performing a review is not necessarily harmful but can be benefitial if it happens in an acceptable or tolerable tone.

In this specific case, there is the question as to which parts of the mod borg- would not disagree with to have in a24 of Wildfire Games.

There were some thoughts by online players and even WFG staff members to adopt some of his work (that ought to be the task description if one has a review queue I suppose). From my side hard-counters were a thought I had that should be explored to make the gameplay less linear. borg- did explore that, it's his full right to do so to take it into any way he imagines, and good that he did explore things in general. Also good that he tested it with other human players. The real problem is the interaction between the developer that may have the thought to adopt some of the work and borg- exploring more things before getting one thing into a24 at a time, if he wants to take something into a24. borg- also repeated to me multiple times that multiple changes combined are necessary to actually test this. So I suppose it's really, well, a distributed problem. It's also my problem because I mentioned that I had some interest in seeing that patch, or the explanation of the conditions to having patches submitted for review to Wildfire Games. And the problem of others too who didn't provide borg- the feedback that he could use to become even better at what he is doing. All of that was called review work back in the day. Considering and testing the game with AI players is one of the areas subject to a review. So that particularly isn't bad to have done and reported. The question is really the one about dedication. Should this mod be reviewed for Wildfire Games or not for the purpose of adopting parts of it for Wildfire Games? Then it would meet the primary objectives of the organization, if the tone is acceptable or tolerable. If there is no wish to have the mod reviewed by Wildfire Games, then the claimed purposes of the thread would be less relevant.

The discussion usually would take place on Phabricator, where a specific coherent feature would be taken out of the mod and analyzed for their impact on the game. If this discussion would be on Phabricator, there at least wouldn't be a discussion as to whether a review of the features makes sense or not. If I had finalized some dedication to a software repository decision we'd also have a different discussion. @Loki1950 say the line!

[Loki1950]

Enjoy the Choice

[StopKillingMe]

6 hours ago, elexis said:

The software license relates to redistributing possibly modified copies, the implicit or explicit usage rules enforced by moderators determine what conduct is permissible on the service.

Performing a review is not necessarily harmful but can be benefitial if it happens in an acceptable or tolerable tone.

In this specific case, there is the question as to which parts of the mod borg- would not disagree with to have in a24 of Wildfire Games.

There were some thoughts by online players and even WFG staff members to adopt some of his work (that ought to be the task description if one has a review queue I suppose). From my side hard-counters were a thought I had that should be explored to make the gameplay less linear. borg- did explore that, it's his full right to do so to take it into any way he imagines, and good that he did explore things in general. Also good that he tested it with other human players. The real problem is the interaction between the developer that may have the thought to adopt some of the work and borg- exploring more things before getting one thing into a24 at a time, if he wants to take something into a24. borg- also repeated to me multiple times that multiple changes combined are necessary to actually test this. So I suppose it's really, well, a distributed problem. It's also my problem because I mentioned that I had some interest in seeing that patch, or the explanation of the conditions to having patches submitted for review to Wildfire Games. And the problem of others too who didn't provide borg- the feedback that he could use to become even better at what he is doing. All of that was called review work back in the day. Considering and testing the game with AI players is one of the areas subject to a review. So that particularly isn't bad to have done and reported. The question is really the one about dedication. Should this mod be reviewed for Wildfire Games or not for the purpose of adopting parts of it for Wildfire Games? Then it would meet the primary objectives of the organization, if the tone is acceptable or tolerable. If there is no wish to have the mod reviewed by Wildfire Games, then the claimed purposes of the thread would be less relevant.

The discussion usually would take place on Phabricator, where a specific coherent feature would be taken out of the mod and analyzed for their impact on the game. If this discussion would be on Phabricator, there at least wouldn't be a discussion as to whether a review of the features makes sense or not. If I had finalized some dedication to a software repository decision we'd also have a different discussion. @Loki1950 say the line!

Understood.  I'll keep digging through it an enumerating what is different from vanilla, if we need to move what I am doing from a thread or to phabricator or whatever of course I will comply.  My feedback and questions in my docs are just my opinions, they don't necessarily mean much more than that.  The only thing I am vehement about in my opinions is that things that are unique to a civ should not be mooted by so called balance changes, and I also see zero purpose in removing the ability to train men and cav from the CC - I won't ever agree that something like that has anything to do with game balance.  Other than those two things, I'm not here to argue with actual game balance changes, whatever makes sense, makes sense.

[feneur]

On 6/12/2019 at 5:50 AM, borg- said:

@feneur please, this is already getting ridiculous. lul

Ridiculous or not I don't really see any reason to do something about this topic. As long as it stays on topic and focuses on the mod itself and not on you or anyone else personally.

[Lion.Kanzen]

28 minutes ago, feneur said:

Ridiculous or not I don't really see any reason to do something about this topic. As long as it stays on topic and focuses on the mod itself and not on you or anyone else personally.

ok, he can focuses and ignore us.

IMHO to me that is fair.I ignored him  to avoid conflicts.

thank you.

[borg-]

Just now, Lion.Kanzen said:

ok, he can focuses and ignore us.

IMHO to me that is fair.I ignored him  to avoid conflicts.

thank you.

Actually I do not care because he's doing it based on an old version of a mod that is under construction and ever changing. Besides the only one who knows about all the changes is me. That's why I used the word "ridiculous." But this is even good, it will save me a lot of time when I'm finished mod and need to do the documentation.

[StopKillingMe]

12 minutes ago, borg- said:

Actually I do not care because he's doing it based on an old version of a mod that is under construction and ever changing. Besides the only one who knows about all the changes is me. That's why I used the word "ridiculous." But this is even good, it will save me a lot of time when I'm finished mod and need to do the documentation.

That is kind of the purpose of me getting involved at this level of detail - all I can do is hope that you will understand this.  I don't think anyone is questioning what you are doing, the concern is more about how you are doing it.  Good/Bad/or Indifferent - what you are changing needs to be logged.  Really the only reason why, is that in the unlikely event that your changes have unintended consequences, we need to know how it happened and what needs to be done to backtrack.  It's really that simple.  My personal opinion?  You should be tracking this stuff yourself, the fact that I have to do it for you is incredibly disappointing to me. But I am invested enough in this game for it to be worthwhile.