Bring back a23

[thankforpieOfficial]

On 12/03/2021 at 6:05 PM, borg- said:

The problem is that you are able to maintain historical realism.
Javelins for example were effective against heavy infantry and not long-range units, but either way it can be adjusted and I like how you think.

bold of you to assume that all 0ad players have interest in history

Edited June 11, 2022 by thankforpieOfficial

[borg-]

23 minutes ago, thankforpieOfficial said:

BRING BACK A23 BCUZ I CANT PLAY OTHER CIV THAN OP GAULS

bold of you to assume that 0ad players care about history

Most of our changes had a historical context. I have always made it clear here on the forum that it is very important to have a historical foundation.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

25 minutes ago, thankforpieOfficial said:

bold of you to assume that 0ad players care about history

They must, since there are plenty of other free games out there they could play if they didn't care about history. 

Even if I didn't give 2 cares about WW2 history I would still think it silly for a bazooka to take out the Battleship Bismark. 

Edited March 12, 2021 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Silier]

well if they don't like the historical aspect of the game, they just need to find another game to play. 

there are different types of games and different things players enjoy, it just may not be the correct one

 

0 A.D. (pronounced “zero-ey-dee”) is a free, open-source, historical Real Time Strategy (RTS) game currently under development by Wildfire Games, a global group of volunteer game developers. As the leader of an ancient civilization, you must gather the resources you need to raise a military force and dominate your enemies.

[Palaxin]

1 hour ago, nani said:

Very interesting, could you link to where that decision was made?

probably this one:

On 02/12/2014 at 12:51 PM, niektb said:

In fact hard counters were removed in Alpha 17 after it was deciced (with a good discussion) that a soft counter system is easier to balance (dunno which topic)

The idea was to implement counters purely by gameplay mechanics such as charging for cavalry, directional attacks, formations, camouflage etc. Many of these things would consume "stamina", that would regenerate slowly...

Basically to implement counters by making combat more realistic...

Many of these features are still in the official list of planned features, but honestly I do not see progress in that direction (may be also due to some programmers not active anymore that were willing to implement these features)...

 

1 hour ago, borg- said:

The problem is that you are able to maintain historical realism.
Javelins for example were effective against heavy infantry and not long-range units, but either way it can be adjusted and I like how you think.

Yeah you are right... I prefer historic realism as well, my point was more to establish are clear counter scheme (that is clear/stable enough to not change overall strategies because of minor balance changes)

1 hour ago, ChronA said:

borg ninja-ed me. For most people, what is intuitive is based on how Age of Empires 2 did things. But that is often a far cry from historical reality.

true... I have to remind myself more often of that!

1 hour ago, thankforpieOfficial said:

BRING BACK A23 BCUZ I CANT PLAY OTHER CIV THAN OP GAULS

bold of you to assume that 0ad players care about history

I do not think there are "0ad players" in general... some care more about competition and gameplay, some more about history, some about city-building, ...

The game will always attract different players but I think it should stick with its roots

Edited March 12, 2021 by Palaxin
link soft counter post

[thankforpieOfficial]

2 minutes ago, Palaxin said:

I do not think there are "0ad players" in general... some care more about competition and gameplay, some more about history, some about city-building, ...

The game will always attract different players but I think it should stick with its roots

well it wouldnt make sense to suddenly stop basing future patches on history consdiering up until now it was all based on the past

[Lion.Kanzen]

48 minutes ago, thankforpieOfficial said:

BRING BACK A23 BCUZ I CANT PLAY OTHER CIV THAN OP GAULS

bold of you to assume that 0ad players care about history

This isn't a democracy or or some result product, marketing to sell to the largest possible audience.

 

Then both ends must be taken and combine them in the best possible way.

 

 If we were not interested in the historically correct part, we would take pop culture as a reference and we would go to the Hollywood style , that is historically incorrect.

then we wouldn't waste time reading texts and looking for historically correct information.

Either we would be very cartoon or we would be historical fantasy like Spartacus.

And if we continued to listen to people we would even make it politically correct and inclusive.

 

An old world with inclusivity, vegan and all that propaganda. None of the symbols that can be considered nationalist would be allowed.

 

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

I leave you a precedent from AoE 3 DE.

 

https://youtu.be/EpPo_HlKAKM.

 

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Lion.Kanzen

[fatherbushido]

15 hours ago, nani said:

Very interesting, could you link to where that decision was made?

That was posted many times. Those things were around 2014. At the time there was a design group, then one person in charge of the gameplay. That was the beginning of the lobby too.

 

A time of changes:

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/15644

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/15655

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/15713

 

Decision of moving to hard counters to gameplay features:

 

But then, there was an appraisal of those changes:

 

[nani]

6 hours ago, fatherbushido said:

Decision of moving to hard counters to gameplay features:

 

No permissions to view

[fatherbushido]

10 minutes ago, nani said:

No permissions to view

Oh sorry!

It was in 2014, the decision was made to remove hard counters (like the rps designed in the early years) and replace them with stats (speed, accuracy, range...) and gameplay features (flanking, ...).

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

35 minutes ago, fatherbushido said:

gameplay features (flanking, ...).

About that....

[LetswaveaBook]

I think the dev team has things quite right. I think only small stat changes are in place. From what I´ve seen in AoE2, small changes can have a drastic impact on the preferred strategy in RTS games. I am more the type of boom player and I think booming is advantageous against turtling opponents.

However I can understand that the meta currently might not be the best it could be. I think it would be solved with a few small stat changes. If melee cavalry and infantry swordsmen(for infantry swordsmen maybe also +10% speed) would get +1 pierce armor and towers would take +50% longer to build and upgrade, I think the meta would be fine.

[Lion.Kanzen]

how many weeks since this post was opened and not a single tangible solution?

 

Mistakes were made? Yes.

 

The errors of 24 have been improved, that's where we are.

 

I honestly like the mechanics of A24 more than how horrible A23 was.

 

Is it going to be unbalanced? Obviously, it is a game in development.

 

People can stay on A23 if they want to, but many of the complainers don't propose anything, don't patch, don't test SVN, don't appear in The phabricator.

 

How is it possible that we take them into account if they do not make a minimum effort?

[Trinketos]

52 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

how many weeks since this post was opened and not a single tangible solution?

 

Mistakes were made? Yes.

 

The errors of 24 have been improved, that's where we are.

 

I honestly like the mechanics of A24 more than how horrible A23 was.

 

Is it going to be unbalanced? Obviously, it is a game in development.

 

People can stay on A23 if they want to, but many of the complainers don't propose anything, don't patch, don't test SVN, don't appear in The phabricator.

 

How is it possible that we take them into account if they do not make a minimum effort?

Based

[Lion.Kanzen]

Just now, Trinketos said:

Based

Redpillled anonbro

[Lion.Kanzen]

The audiences are renewed ...

It would be nice to read a bit of this and take note.

 

[Yekaterina]

 

[borg-]

As I said at the time, a24 was necessary for us to have better later alphas, and that's what happened, today we have a much better version than a23, and improving fast.

[LetswaveaBook]

2 hours ago, borg- said:

As I said at the time, a24 was necessary for us to have better later alphas, and that's what happened, today we have a much better version than a23, and improving fast.

I didn't play alpha 23 much, but I think A26 is worse for me than A24 and A25.

By the way: I know some people have strong feelings about A24, but that doesn't affect my opinion.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

7 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

 

@real_tabasco_sauce

 

Ken Wood.

[Yekaterina]

A23 had great sound effects and battles. At least we can get the sounds back. I've already done some of the restoration in the AbstractGUI mod but would be good to implement it in vanilla.

[alre]

17 hours ago, LetswaveaBook said:

I didn't play alpha 23 much, but I think A26 is worse for me than A24 and A25.

By the way: I know some people have strong feelings about A24, but that doesn't affect my opinion.

I'm curious to know why is that. Personally I didn't experience A26 much, but it seemed to me it was an enhancement compared to A25.

Also I loved A24, but it seems I'm in strict minority. At least they just won an Oscar, lol. 

[Stan`]

2 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

A23 had great sound effects

It's funny because a lot of people complained that battles felt like dishes hitting each other.

[LetswaveaBook]

9 hours ago, alre said:

I'm curious to know why is that. Personally I didn't experience A26 much, but it seemed to me it was an enhancement compared to A25.

The most common and basic strategy for 0AD is booming with infantry.

I an A25 you could rush with mercenary cavalry to play in a way that allowed you to interact more with your enemy. That added some variety to the game. In A26, prices of mercenary cavalry were increased and this rush was pushed to the sidelines of existance.

Also, I dislike acceleration. Cavalry rushing and (extended) early cavalry play in 1v1s in A25 was all ready a strategy that required the attacker to play at his very best. In A26, cavalry rushing became less effecting. In A26 the boomer had probably also the easier strategy and A26 only enhanced that. This is probably my main concern. Booming in A26 and then defeating an (often lesser skilled) opponent in a big battle did not feel as rewarding as constant action. Booming and then losing an lesser skilled opponent did not feel nice either.

Also, the pikemen change did feel bad for me. The pike men felt like a clown unit: its low attack makes it a bad and laughable fighter. Its only purpose is to soak damage, which in respect it does fairly well. In A26 it even more laughable in single combat and therefore it is forced even more in its clown role of soaking damage.

Pikemen were an asset in their A25's clown role. However for Seleucids, Macedonians and Kushites this benefit was offset by weaker hero's, so it felt reasonable. In A26, only their weaker clown role did not feel like a nice trade off. I want pikemen (specialized to 4 factions) to be something cool, instead of being relied on their clown role of damage soaking.

By the way: please don't bother me with any team game logic. A game that is only optimized for team games might not be good for 1v1s. I think if the game wants to be good, it should also be good for 1v1s. Conversely, I believe that a game that is good for 1v1s is most likely also good for team games. I actually never really took team games that seriously, though I enjoyed them when  was looking for a less serious game (and when they didn't disconnect).

In A25 it was worth to spend some time waiting to play a higher rated 1v1 game. In A26 I often felt disappointed after waiting for a while and then playing a disappointing game.

 

Anyway, that is how I feel and that could just be personal.