0 AD's focus on balance has crippled its design

[LetswaveaBook]

15 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

If volunteer developers enjoy building new civs instead of doing other things, more power to them!

All the power.

1 minute ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Mauryas ended who?

They fought against Seleucus the first and they are an important reason elephants entered the battlefield of the era. Honestly, the story of Seleucus the first is the best story of any greek general of the time and possible all time. Mauryas definitely deserve to be in for that alone.

9 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Kushites what? Spartans are largely a backwater, insular city state, but they're included because they are famous and fun and add diversity. Mauryas included because they are awesome and add diversity, but had zero contact with Rome. Kushites had a few minor border wars with Rome, but are included to add fun and diversity to the civ roster.

Maybe we then need a fation that actually did matter? Or settle on that we can't agree on this one.

[Stan`]

35 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Maybe we then need a fation that actually did matter? Or settle on that we can't agree on this one.

I think @psypherium made a good point about that in his video by saying inclusion wouldn't matter if we didn't have any assets for the hans or any of the other civs. We are not considering the yayoi Japan for inclusion because there are barely any assets, Lordgood never released the buildings. Han, Xiongnu, Zapotecs, Scythians have their own assets which make them eligible. The Kushites got in the game that way.

In other words we are stripping potential fun away by not including a civilization that's probably more complete than a few of the 13 civs when they got in the game.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

1 hour ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Honestly, the story of Seleucus the first is the best story of any greek general of the time and possible all time.

The story of Seleucus is in my list of screenplay ideas. 

 

1 hour ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Maybe we then need a fation that actually did matter?

Han Chinese are a very large and extremely influential civilization. Scythians and Xiongnu are civilizations that span the breadth of Asia and link East with West. They'd also add all-new gameplay possibilities. Honestly, Scythians and Xiongnu would probably be refreshing to a lot of people (even if hard to balance; but again, there's no rule to state you'd have to allow them in your rated multiplayer matches [we can can include a Random/Settle Civilizations option that excludes nomads, see:DE]; also, we could surprise ourselves and actually balance them fairly well, we don't know yet). 

 

1 hour ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Or settle on that we can't agree on this one.

That's fine.  I just think 1 or more new civs are eventually going to be added. You'll probably enjoy them even if they don't fit your theme*.  

 

* Civs like Zapotecs and Maya and Olmecs (Mesoamericans, essentially) don't fit at all, we can agree on that. I still would like to see them as some kind of "official expansion" or mod in the download section eventually (perhaps as part of an Alpha release; a kind of "content" pack released in parallel).  

Edited December 25, 2021 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[smiley]

Quote

0 A.D. is a slice in time. Imagine if all the ancient worlds (at the peak of their civilisations) were pitted one against another. We are plucking major civilisations out of their linear timeframe and placing them in the slice of time, which is 0 A.D.

The theme isn't rome-centric. The main consideration is being notable during the Bronze Age I guess. Narrowing that down to empires with roads that led to Rome cuts out a whole portion of ancient history.

Disclaimer, I am not literally using the Rome metaphor. The point being that the current "theme" is the classic sets of civilizations around the Mediterranean and their outreach.

[smiley]

There was also an idea floating around sometime on this forum to allow for civ branching with phases. You start as Mycenaean, and get more specific with phases or something. I believe the actual example was the Roman Kingdom, Roman Republic and the Roman Empire. The problem is that you can't easily get balanced linear progression for all civs, but maybe that's not a problem.

[Stan`]

12 minutes ago, smiley said:

There was also an idea floating around sometime on this forum to allow for civ branching with phases. You start as Mycenaean, and get more specific with phases or something. I believe the actual example was the Roman Kingdom, Roman Republic and the Roman Empire. The problem is that you can't easily get balanced linear progression for all civs, but maybe that's not a problem.

Yeah that was the original plan before the split from Celt to Briton/Gaul and Hele to Athen/Mace/Spart and Sele/Ptol  it was a nice plan, although it could have lead to a very complex tech tree (which depending on what you like is a blessing or a curse)

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

23 hours ago, Stan` said:

Yeah that was the original plan before the split from Celt to Briton/Gaul and Hele to Athen/Mace/Spart and Sele/Ptol  it was a nice plan, although it could have lead to a very complex tech tree (which depending on what you like is a blessing or a curse)

I think the main issue with that, was that it was originally only going to give you different heroes and champions, and that was it. If it were to be designed today, I think the choice would be at the beginning. Leaving it until City Phase makes the "Hellenes" for example feel very generic, until you pick "Macedonians" in City phase and get Pikeman and Spear Cav champions. You lose out on all the Macedonian flavor in the early phases. No Thessalians. No Hypaspist champions. No Thracians. No unique architectural elements. No unique techs (until the very end).

It wasn't a bad idea for its time, but we know so much more now about how these factions were unique (specifically militarily, when talking about the Greek civs). The original design had no Seleucids and their awesome War Elephants. The original design had no Ptolemaic Egyptians with their awesome architecture and mix of ethnicities.

I could see something where you choose your "Civilization" in game setup. So, "Greeks" for example or "Successor States" or "Romans" or "Celts" or "Nomads", and then when the match starts you get a popup where you choose the "Faction" from that Civilization. So, Greeks -> Athenians, Spartans, Thebans. Successor States -> Macedonians, Seleucids, Ptolemies. Romans -> Republic, Principate, Dominate. Celts -> Gauls, Britons, Celtiberians. Nomads -> Scythians, Xiongnu, Huns. That way, your enemies know what Civilization you chose, but not which Faction until they scout you.

Edited December 26, 2021 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[wraitii]

I remain the opinion that the only way to content all groups is this (or anyways, the idea of 'splitting our civs into balancing groups that are internally balanced but externally not so much')

You make the balancing problem much easier, which lets you make much larger roster changes because you don't have to make sure that Kushites won't be OP against Romans or something, and that lets you have some actual gameplay variety both between and within groups.

I think people have made the other points already.

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

with the variety of troops we are falling short and following the AOE2 formula a lot.

 

It has already been shown that the AOE2 formula is boring in games that are not AOE2.

AoEIV did not innovate anything.

 

For me the game fails  in the late game.

Between phase 2 and 3 everything is going very fast.

The other thing is more variety of units that balance those of the traditional units.

The so-called tribes could use incendiary units. And quite a rush.

[Lion.Kanzen]

On 20/12/2021 at 5:40 AM, Yekaterina said:

Unique features = new imbalances

 

Yes and not.

 

you always create a countermeasure unit or building.

[Lion.Kanzen]

On 23/12/2021 at 1:07 AM, maroder said:

Have to agree I would vote to just include every civ from DE that is over 80 percent done. Then do balancing by grouping civs.

 

the mechanical concept?

 

It becomes asymmetrical, it's good. It is what is trendy.

— Don't forget the old school  taste —

[Lion.Kanzen]

On 25/12/2021 at 4:08 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

could see something where you choose your "Civilization" in game setup. So, "Greeks" for example or "Successor States" or "Romans" or "Celts" or "Nomads", and then when the match starts you get a popup where you choose the "Faction" from that Civilization. So, Greeks -> Athenians, Spartans, Thebans. Successor States -> Macedonians, Seleucids, Ptolemies. Romans -> Republic, Principate, Dominate. Celts -> Gauls, Britons, Celtiberians. Nomads -> Scythians, Xiongnu, Huns. That way, your enemies know what Civilization you chose, but not which Faction until they scout you.

the first Empire Earth towards that.

Game mode: surprise?

Evolve?.

[LetswaveaBook]

On 23/12/2021 at 8:07 AM, maroder said:

Have to agree I would vote to just include every civ from DE that is over 80 percent done. Then do balancing by grouping civs.

If we rotate in every civ of delenda est that is over 80% done and rotate out any civ from A25 that is not 80% done, we would end with a game were we only have Iberians, Carthaginians, Ptolemies, Kushites, Seleucids and Mauryas.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

1 hour ago, LetswaveaBook said:

If we rotate in every civ of delenda est that is over 80% done and rotate out any civ from A25 that is not 80% done, we would end with a game were we only have Iberians, Carthaginians, Ptolemies, Kushites, Seleucids and Mauryas.

Well, depends on what you consider "80% done" to mean.

[LetswaveaBook]

12 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Well, depends on what you consider "80% done" to mean.

That's true. But we can say that some factions have way more personality than others.

 OPtolemies, Kushites, Seleucids and Mauryas have way more unique features than many others. Many factions feel bland apart from having a different roster/heroes and minor bonusses.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

17 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

That's true. But we can say that some factions have way more personality than others.

 OPtolemies, Kushites, Seleucids and Mauryas have way more unique features than many others. Many factions feel bland apart from having a different roster/heroes and minor bonusses.

I think Athenians and Spartans feel pretty unique, at least DE's versions.  Scythians just need their Forge tech tree revamped (they currently use the Persian forge techs). Dunno.