Jump to content

Thread for posting suggestions for Alpha 26


m7600
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think the best we can do is doing it BfME2-style and allow you to upgrade towers to catapult towers, with a catapult on top that throws stones, or "guard towers" that shoot arrows. The only thing that really prevents this right now is that wallset code only allows for setting 1 template as a "WallTower."

 


  <WallSet>
    <Templates>
      <Tower>structures/athen/wall_tower</Tower>
      <Gate>structures/athen/wall_gate</Gate>
      <WallLong>structures/athen/wall_long</WallLong>
      <WallMedium>structures/athen/wall_medium</WallMedium>
      <WallShort>structures/athen/wall_short</WallShort>
    </Templates>
    <MaxTowerOverlap>0.90</MaxTowerOverlap>
    <MinTowerOverlap>0.05</MinTowerOverlap>
  </WallSet>

 <Tower> here needs to allow for  datatype="tokens" so multiple tower types can be rejoined with all segments. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Loki1950 said:

The archers on the walls are a very good looking hack but a hack none the less putting any other unit on the walls/turrets just will not work ATM it would need some very tricky work on the game engine at a fairly low level as well as a complete refactoring of large sections of code all that would take about 6 to 8 months of work for at least two programmers,we just do not have those resources now.

Enjoy the Choice :) 

You mean to have moving units on a wall?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I think the best we can do is doing it BfME2-style and allow you to upgrade towers to catapult towers, with a catapult on top that throws stones, or "guard towers" that shoot arrows. The only thing that really prevents this right now is that wallset code only allows for setting 1 template as a "WallTower."

 


  <WallSet>
    <Templates>
      <Tower>structures/athen/wall_tower</Tower>
      <Gate>structures/athen/wall_gate</Gate>
      <WallLong>structures/athen/wall_long</WallLong>
      <WallMedium>structures/athen/wall_medium</WallMedium>
      <WallShort>structures/athen/wall_short</WallShort>
    </Templates>
    <MaxTowerOverlap>0.90</MaxTowerOverlap>
    <MinTowerOverlap>0.05</MinTowerOverlap>
  </WallSet>

 <Tower> here needs to allow for  datatype="tokens" so multiple tower types can be rejoined with all segments. 

catapults are currently useless without any form of area damage so it would have to be a bolt shooter.

What about upgrading regular defensive towers to bolt shooter towers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/11/2021 at 2:02 PM, Gurken Khan said:

I'd like to suggest to increase the visibility of buildings' self garrison indicators (or whatever the tt is).

0ad-ssg.jpg.eb82d34f56e438804a6079be5bd09fd3.jpg

I feel calling the status quo (1) 'subtle'  - at least for stables - would be an understatement, you kinda have to know that there should be an indicator and when looking for it you might find it; so I'm proposing something like (2), same position as CCs (if your CCs happen to have these indicators) and a longer and bolder line.

To add more to the suggestion "to increase the visibility of buildings", my concern is not the actual visibility of the building, but how to distinguish one building from other building. I have a bit of a visual problem so it is hard for me to sometimes tell what some buildings are. Especially, when game play is active and you are frantically searching for a particular building.  I would like to see more visual cues embedded in a building that makes it easier to identify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Then let's add area damage for catapults.

We had area damage in A23, but it was cut in A24. Which I personally feel was to far and a better solution would have been to just reduce the area damage to a more balanced degree. If necessary one could also limit the catapult numbers, like what has been done in Delende Est.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, soloooy0 said:

the only problem with the damage area and the linear damage is that it does not have friendly fire, that would be a way to avoid making balls of units so that the catas or bolts eliminate everything.

It could have. That's implemented. @Nescio and the persons that accepted the patches felt that because catapults don't have shrapnels it made little sense for them to damage their surroundings.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Stan` said:

It could have. That's implemented. @Nescio and the persons that accepted the patches felt that because catapults don't have shrapnels it made little sense for them to damage their surroundings.

 

I think this was a bad patch tbh.

If you throw say a 2m diameter stone with a catapult over some distance, its gonna have on impact a crater with bigger diameter than the projectile, ie crush damage.

I wouldn't want to stand next to such an impact, even small stones hurled around from the ground would be like shrapnel, ie should also have little pierce damage, ideally more damaging humans, animals than buildings.

 

Just gave the Han Mangonel the crush back, already wondered about its uselessness when testing. These aren't high precision weapons.

 

Edited by artoo
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure if anyone has considered this, but all catapults in the game are currently of the twin arm torsion variation we call ballistas, which are significantly more accurate than an onager or mangonel, so it is reasonable to assume that you could fire a stone ball in a line through multiple lines of troops or failing that have the stone ricochet off the ground through rows of troops. The kinetic energy alone from a partial hit would severely damage an individual.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Stan` said:

It could have. That's implemented. @Nescio and the persons that accepted the patches felt that because catapults don't have shrapnels it made little sense for them to damage their surroundings.

boulders don't roll? buildings don't get ripped apart sending projectiles all directions? 

Edited by chrstgtr
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chrstgtr said:

boulders don't roll? buildings don't get ripped apart sending projectiles all directions?

Physics and material failure modes aside, it is not outrageous to have catapults do splash damage. 

I would argue that it would be nice (for gameplay) to have a smaller radius than in a23 but greater damage within that.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

Physics and material failure modes aside, it is not outrageous to have catapults do splash damage. 

I would argue that it would be nice (for gameplay) to have a smaller radius than in a23 but greater damage within that.

This I agree upon, but I think the damage should be left at whatever percentile of the current total damage it is calculated at. I noticed that bolt shooters became more efficient at killing again in A25 because of the path finding now having troops bunch up really tightly allowing for greater linear damage than in A24. Catapult damage was increased in A24, which is also why I think it would be unnecessary to increase the damage further in the blast radius. The current damage should be sufficient to produce a decent area damage percentile within an A25 context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The projectile speed in archer templates is way too high with 100 m/s.

I'll take a shot trying to balance this with real measured data for bows and crossbows with corresponding range in the Han mod.

Avg bow is about ~48 m/s, the crossbow is at 60+ m/s. The Mongol bow 1000 years later is at 60 m/s.

Edited by artoo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, alre said:

@artoo times and distances in the templates have nothing to do with true values.

 

So why even bother having a projectile speed in m/s defined in the entity template, along with range in meters?

a balancing is needed if Han could be considered to be included in game.

It would also lead to more visible projectiles in the game, just saying, they are way too fast, not based on realism, which is possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defining speed in m/s is appropriate as it is the S.I. unit for speed. However, we can adjust the dimensions of everything else on the map and perhaps the map itself. We can also distort some of the numbers we use, for example if 60m/s is too fast for a bow we can decrease to 40m/s. The only concern is that cavalry can escape projectiles if the projectile flies too slowly. I am not sure if that would be welcomed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Reyhan said:

Defining speed in m/s is appropriate as it is the S.I. unit for speed. However, we can adjust the dimensions of everything else on the map and perhaps the map itself. We can also distort some of the numbers we use, for example if 60m/s is too fast for a bow we can decrease to 40m/s. The only concern is that cavalry can escape projectiles if the projectile flies too slowly. I am not sure if that would be welcomed.

Without trying to be nitpicking, but the speed and range values are kind of very off real values.

Atm, archers have a projectile speed of 100 m/s, about double as fast as they should be, while range is too low, maybe 70 or 80 m. But this all depends on the bow and arrows used, so a kind of average for bow and arrow weight has to do.

Javelins are thrown atm with incredible 60 m/s, with is off by a factor 3 assuming maybe a 800 grams Javelin, while the range is fine with ~30 m

Edited by artoo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, artoo said:

Without trying to be nitpicking, but the speed and range values are kind of very off real values.

Atm, archers have a projectile speed of 100 m/s, about double as fast as they should be, while range is too low, maybe 70 or 80 m. But this all depends on the bow and arrows used, so a kind of average for bow and arrow weight has to do.

Javelins are thrown atm with incredible 60 m/s, with is off by a factor 3 assuming maybe a 800 grams Javelin, while the range is fine with ~30 m

I didn't know that the problem is this severe! But I think we have to make some compromise on the speed of projectiles so that ranged units do not become obsolete. In real life it is too easy to dodge an arrow if you see it coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...