Jump to content

Long Term Fun & Balancing to achieve that


the-x
 Share

Recommended Posts

 The most important Issue we should all be working on is the Long Term Fun of 0ad. I see it inmyself, we might all come to the point where we see we actually optimized every tactic or every playstile and every game seems the same. At leat there are actually 2 , mostly balanced , stratgies

- I rush with Cav

- I boom (and that of course with ptol) and get as soon as i am in II massive units out and surprise my enemy the moment he has invested in III where i won against almost every player like chrstgr, dakeyras and a lot more

 

What we need is more combinations, more general strategies and more tactics.

 

We can try to find Ideas which might help that

- Every Civ becomes it individualizes units

-- 2 or 3 more special unique units

-- Balance all the Units for every Civ individually, for example since ptol have many advantages there I units might be a bit more expensive or less attack damage

 

- Random Unit cap which makes it more necessary for some player to rush and dont play every game the same

 

I would really favor to do more in balancing and unique units. The same way they are mathematically and logic at the moment but more difference between civs - really do we need more differences between the units and make it possible to interact in early Phase with stone paper scissor in the beginning and not only cav.

 

Who is interested in more Content can comment my Videos where you see all the strategies but only the otimal (the 2 optimal) Strategies in the last games

 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, the-x said:

 The most important Issue we should all be working on is the Long Term Fun of 0ad. I see it inmyself, we might all come to the point where we see we actually optimized every tactic or every playstile and every game seems the same. At leat there are actually 2 , mostly balanced , stratgies

- I rush with Cav

- I boom (and that of course with ptol) and get as soon as i am in II massive units out and surprise my enemy the moment he has invested in III where i won against almost every player like chrstgr, dakeyras and a lot more

 

What we need is more combinations, more general strategies and more tactics.

 

We can try to find Ideas which might help that

- Every Civ becomes it individualizes units

-- 2 or 3 more special unique units

-- Balance all the Units for every Civ individually, for example since ptol have many advantages there I units might be a bit more expensive or less attack damage

 

- Random Unit cap which makes it more necessary for some player to rush and dont play every game the same

 

I would really favor to do more in balancing and unique units. The same way they are mathematically and logic at the moment but more difference between civs - really do we need more differences between the units and make it possible to interact in early Phase with stone paper scissor in the beginning and not only cav.

 

Who is interested in more Content can comment my Videos where you see all the strategies but only the otimal (the 2 optimal) Strategies in the last games

 

What you also see here is, that the only real challenge i see atm is the linear rise in building houses at the right time with the right amount of citizens and as soon as possible building more barracs so my ressources are low as possible and lineary to pop rising.

I wish more Interaction, more different Strategies

with the other rush, the cav the same, just clicking and reaction time and these 2 are the only effective strategies which is too less, especially there is no counter that f.e. A > B > C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you get bored playing the same strategy over and over again, invent another one!

With Ptolemies, have you tried:

  • Mercenary rush
  • Spamming colonies around enemy base to annoy them
  • Slinger rush 
  • Pikeman rush
  • Camel spam
  • Bolt shooter rush
  • Siege towers
  • Champion cav raid
  • All elephant army
  • Catapult + ram flood
  • Naval maps

?

Every civ has fun strategies already invented and waiting to be discovered. 

By the way, your strategy of booming fast then pushing with all mercs is very effective if your enemy doesn't know what you are doing (I lost 2 matches against you this way). But the third match we played, you tried the exact same thing again and you lost to me. The reason is, I predicted what you will do so I chose Spartans, outboomed you and got a fortress in your way. Then I baited your army into the range of my fort then I had hoplites to handle your pikes and teleported Skiritai into your crowd of ranged units. 

40 minutes ago, the-x said:

2 or 3 more special unique units

There used to be a lot of unique units in A23 but they were deleted for balancing purposes and historical inaccuracy. Also there are untrainable units in the Atlas editor that you can try (e.g. Roman gladiators). I would really like the Spartan and Athenian Stoas to return, as well as Cardakes Mercenary, even if then bend history a bit. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, the-x said:

and make it possible to interact in early Phase with stone paper scissor in the beginning and not only cav.

Good point. Actually they can interact but cav is very easy to escape, does the most damage and hurts your eco the least, so people use it the most. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yekaterina said:

When you get bored playing the same strategy over and over again, invent another one!

Thats a nice Idea :-) but since i want to optimize there are only two strategys that make sence: The Cav rush or the full Boom

 

and make it possible to interact in early Phase with stone paper scissor in the beginning and not only cav.

Good point. Actually they can interact but cav is very easy to escape, does the most damage and hurts your eco the least, so people use it the most. 

 

--> Yes, it might be an Idea to have at leat 3 - A - B - C Units you choose on at the start and already have an interesting counter system

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interestin Idea to solve this may be in Phase I

that we add 1 Unit and all those behave in the way a>b>c so that it really makes a difference what players choose and depending your choice you may lead a more defensive game or trying to tech up faster.

Another Idea: Since CC Radiusses dont become ever the border except for building the one fortress AND very late in P3 - we need to have more interaction with land, with spaces, now maps are to big, ressources are save and one player has to leave completely his own base if he wants to attack the other base -> these are important issues in gameplay we need better Ideas or players will sooner or later give up 0ad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, the-x said:

Since CC Radiusses dont become ever the border except for building the one fortress AND very late in P3 - we need to have more interaction with land, with spaces, now maps are to big, ressources are save and one player has to leave completely his own base if he wants to attack the other base

This is map dependent. In A24 wood was scarce in 1v1s and then territory would be important for control of woods.

I think it is important to distinguish between map issues and structure tree issues. Some issues can be solved by creating a different map. I think people would have experienced A24 entirely different if there was more metal on the map.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, LetswaveaBook said:

This is map dependent. In A24 wood was scarce in 1v1s and then territory would be important for control of woods.

I think it is important to distinguish between map issues and structure tree issues. Some issues can be solved by creating a different map. I think people would have experienced A24 entirely different if there was more metal on the map.

it's not only that. the fact that territory expansion is so expensive makes the game meta dwindle between turtling and aggro, because you basically only have your starting base anyway. no other strategies are viable.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, alre said:

it's not only that. the fact that territory expansion is so expensive makes the game meta dwindle between turtling and aggro, because you basically only have your starting base anyway. no other strategies are viable.

Yes, there might be some more strategical decisions; Territory Expansion should become a real strategical thing - not everything is everywhere and doesnt de facto matter -> it misses deep of the game and that will affect long term fun

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@the-x I agree that this is an extremely important topic that goes beyond alpha to alpha balancing.

I think there are three general categories where improvements will do the best to make the game more fun:

  • civ diversity/ uniqueness 
  • creative and powerful team bonuses (for example britons current team bonus is -25% hero cost and train time)
  • battle mechanics (right now is very simple: melee die, then ranged die)

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/01/2022 at 3:52 PM, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

@the-x I agree that this is an extremely important topic that goes beyond alpha to alpha balancing.

I think there are three general categories where improvements will do the best to make the game more fun:

  • civ diversity/ uniqueness 
  • creative and powerful team bonuses (for example britons current team bonus is -25% hero cost and train time)
  • battle mechanics (right now is very simple: melee die, then ranged die)

 

As we see more and more Players switching to other games, which is completely understandable, if there is no long term fun or real deepend in the game it is Necessary that we not just talk about but that the relevant developers really start to make concepts and evolve Ideas

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, the-x said:

As we see more and more Players switching to other games, which is completely understandable, if there is no long term fun or real deepend in the game it is Necessary that we not just talk about but that the relevant developers really start to make concepts and evolve Ideas

the game is very short. it lacks many technologies, it is not all that it should be. in the last phase it can become boring.

It still lacks content. (That content is coming).

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

in the last phase it can become boring.

If you aske me: here are three problems:

1. players can only use the area inside their territory, which is a small portion of the map.

2. p2 lacks awesomeness. Only mercenary play seems to be a good alternative to staying in p1 longer.

3. There is to little relevant specialization of units.

 

That is why I suggested to make skiritai and mercenary infantry able to gather berres and hunt quickly and allow in p2 farmsteads in neutral territory.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

p2 lacks awesomeness. Only mercenary play seems to be a good alternative to staying in p1 longer.

requires more technologies. Probably new units too. Both defense and attack.

Edited by Lion.Kanzen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

There is to little relevant specialization of units

True, in a25 units either take damage and dont deal it, or deal damage and dont take it, with a few notable exceptions (these are the most fun units to use). Battles are 100% predicted by who will lose their melee first. In my opinion, even a23 slingerfests were more exciting and less predictable battles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

There is to little relevant specialization of units.

 

yes, the problem of little variety.

Economically slaves are needed. Substitute citizens for slaves.

 

In siege of it happens to me. Men carrying a log/ trunk siege ram.

 

another siege unit would be; one that burns buildings. I would only burn the civilian ones. the unit would be suicidal. But it would be cheap.

It would also be used defensively. To burn rams.

In defense, other units would be used for the walls. Someone to throwing rocks, Maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes there is a lack of units that counter specific units.

 

 

 

In AoE 2 you have them all and with variety.

 

 

 

This is due to the lack of roles in some units and the lack of equivalents in the factions.

In 0 A.D. we are not worrying about that.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

True, in a25 units either take damage and dont deal it, or deal damage and dont take it, with a few notable exceptions (these are the most fun units to use).

The units which don't deal damage and don't take it? Yeah. Women rushes are very funny ; )

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/01/2022 at 5:44 PM, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:
On 26/01/2022 at 5:28 PM, LetswaveaBook said:

There is to little relevant specialization of units

True, in a25 units either take damage and dont deal it, or deal damage and dont take it, with a few notable exceptions (these are the most fun units to use). Battles are 100% predicted by who will lose their melee first.

I was actually talking about the efforts on which your units spend most of their time: Namely collecting stuff or getting being garrisoned (for healing or extra defense).

 

For example a weak&cheap unit that has its function to scout for attackers and garrisoning forts in case of an attack could have an interesting role. It also could be a good worker unit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

For example a weak&cheap unit that has its function to scout for attackers and garrisoning forts in case of an attack could have an interesting role. It also could be a good worker unit.

it would be very interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/01/2022 at 5:28 PM, LetswaveaBook said:

If you aske me: here are three problems:

1. players can only use the area inside their territory, which is a small portion of the map.

2. p2 lacks awesomeness. Only mercenary play seems to be a good alternative to staying in p1 longer.

3. There is to little relevant specialization of units.

Yes - especially the point with territory or different units is something that can bring so much more - in the future / long term excitement

When players start to interact with each other and not just have the same build up :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, the-x said:

Yes - especially the point with territory or different units is something that can bring so much more

Indeed. The amount of units is not the problem. The excitement they bring is. Each faction gains access to few units in p2 that could bring excitement if the balance was just a little different.

A few thoughts:

-Using CS sword, spear or axe cavalry in early p2 should usually be fun instead of suicide.

-In early p2 mercenary infantry should have some use.

-slingers in p2 should be a nice opportunity to spent any left over starting stone from p1. Currently (in most cases) there is no left over stone as most factions spent it on building 3 barracks.

-fanatics should be worth their price.

- skiritai should have more use than just being a tougher infantry swordsman.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...