Feedbacks from A26 SVN tests

[Yekaterina]

Today I ran the latest release 26436 and tried the commited version of the Han civilisation, and these are the feedbacks:

General impression: completely new playstyle for this civilisation; the previous build orders don't work anymore -> forces you to think about new build orders. Graphics are very nice as always; animations are very smooth and I even saw a few new Icons!

What I liked:

• Beautiful graphics as always
• Gameplay feels smooth and satisfying with the acceleration feature, especially when controlling archers. 

What I disliked: 

• Icons and buttons have become smaller and smaller...
• Huge tree canopies as before, hiding my storehouse placements and making my eco less efficient. (Not a problem, KateGUI will fix it)
• Changed unit icons - yes they do look prettier now but old player's can't recognise what's what. (not a problem, KateGUI to the rescue)
• I fear that acceleration feature will cause some complaints amongst lobby players

 

Now let's talk about the Han civ:

Differences from other civs:

1. Rice paddies - same price as field, but smaller in size and only 3 women per paddy. However, gathering rate is 0.6 instead of 0.5. Suppose you want to go heavy on cav, other civs might need 12 fields and 60 women on them. For Han, you will only need 50 women + 17 paddies. So paddies are more expensive to set up but great for late game. In early game around 6 paddies are enough, so the wood demand in early game is slightly higher. 

2. Ministers - they can speed up gathering -> compensates for greater resource demand. 

3. A lot of techs available - good for late game. 

4. +10% pop bonus -> amazing late game. 

5. No temples, can only train healers from captured temples -> too bad, need to  fix. The Laozi gate thing is not good enough!

6. Ranged barracks + melee barracks

 

So the general feeling is they are strong at economy but slightly weaker at infantry. Most old players will have a difficult time getting used to this civ!

 

Suggested changes:

1. Use actor model for rice paddies, but use the same stats as farms. Or, adjust the price accordingly: 70 wood per paddy (since they are smaller anyways). 

2. Crossbow infantry have same attack stats as slingers but at greater accuracy; let their cost stay at 50 food, 30 wood and 20 metal. 

3. Champion crossbow cavalry do 28 pierce per 1.25 second. 

4. Either give all civs ranged barracks + melee barracks or cancel the idea for Han. Right now this nerfs their economy too much, as well as early defense. 

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

8 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

Changed unit icons - yes they do look prettier now but old player's can't recognise what's what. (not a problem, KateGUI to the rescue)

Which one?

[Stan`]

21 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

Icons and buttons have become smaller and smaller...

We haven't changed icon size in this alpha. You do have a gui.scale option in the game options now though.

21 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

5. No temples, can only train healers from captured temples -> too bad, need to  fix. The Laozi gate thing is not good enough!

That sounds like a bug they definitely have a temple @wowgetoffyourcellphone

Also, thanks for testing!

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

27 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

I fear that acceleration feature will cause some complaints amongst lobby players

I tried acceleration with the holiday testing bundle, and saw that inf and cav had functionally similar acceleration values, and it seemed to reduce melee maneuverability as much as for cav. My worry was that it would be more frustrating to move units around overall. My hope for the acceleration feature was that cavalry would have a new exploitable weakness that an inf army can use.

@Yekaterina has acceleration been tweaked since or is it the same as it was around dec 20th, 2021?

Edited February 20, 2022 by BreakfastBurrito_007

[Yekaterina]

9 minutes ago, Stan` said:

That sounds like a bug they definitely have a temple

Temple was replaced by Laozi gate - it was intentional, not a bug. Anyways, I can add a temple if you want. 

4 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

as acceleration been tweaked since or is it the same as it was around dec 20th, 2021?

I think quite similar. Although I didn't find it too annoying today. 

 

24 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Which one?

Almost every unit.   Some have different skin colour, others have different standing positions or armours...

[Stan`]

11 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

has acceleration been tweaked since or is it the same as it was around dec 20th, 2021?

It hasn't been changed. There has been like 4 balancing patches committed for A26...

5 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

Temple was replaced by Laozi gate - it was intentional, not a bug. Anyways, I can add a temple if you want. 

Ah, alright then.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

I am confused by a few things. The Han most definitely have a buildable Temple, called the "Simiao."

Edited February 20, 2022 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

18 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

I tried acceleration with the holiday testing bundle, and saw that inf and cav had functionally similar acceleration values, and it seemed to reduce melee maneuverability as much as for cav. My worry was that it would be more frustrating to move units around overall. My hope for the acceleration feature was that cavalry would have a new exploitable weakness that an inf army can use.

I think acceleration should be tweaked to only occur when transitioning from idle or stopped state to move state. If going from move to move, such as when turning at a waypoint, then acceleration should not occur. Also, currently if you task a moving unit to a different target, the moving unit has to accelerate again, each time you task it. As I said, since the unit is already in motion the acceleration should be turned off. 

@wraitii @Freagarach

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

17 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

I think quite similar. Although I didn't find it too annoying today. 

hmm, its probably best not to worry too much about the values for acceleration right now. The values should probably be refined after we test the pre-release candidates with full MP games. It might seem smooth in tests, but if you factor in panic and lag and performance issues it might be too slow like a24.

I was also interested in if anyone was interested in making any of the popular changes introduced by @LetswaveaBook's proposed features mod. That mod has made quite a few balancing changes that add to diversity and fun and balance of 0ad.

The most liked features I think were:

• melee inf +10% attack
• skiritai rank 2 but +30% speed
• persians get spearcav and javcav p1
• iber bonus is reduced to just -10% food, but affects slingers and javelins
• firecav -9 pierce attack
• merc cav->95 metal
• spearcav +1 hack and pierce armor and axecav +2 hack +1 pierce armor

There are some other great changes in there that I would love to see more people test and consider for a26.

 

Edited February 20, 2022 by BreakfastBurrito_007

[real_tabasco_sauce]

51 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

cancel the idea for Han

I would say this is the move. Most of the other civs (ie sparta with 1 ranged unit) don't really have enough unit diversity for that to make sense.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

31 minutes ago, Stan` said:

We haven't changed icon size in this alpha

Indeed. Icons are exactly the same size in this alpha as in the last alpha.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

1 minute ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

I would say this is the move. Most of the other civs (ie sparta with 1 ranged unit) don't really have enough unit diversity for that to make sense.

There's a whole thread about this with viable unit roster additions suggested. The Practice Range/Archery Range would be viable for all civs, as I demonstrated in that thread. The Han, however, do have a huge variety of units already so having a Practice Range can be justified. 

 

56 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

4. Either give all civs ranged barracks + melee barracks or cancel the idea for Han. Right now this nerfs their economy too much, as well as early defense. 

How does it nerf eco? How does it nerf early defense? You can train archers from your CC in village phase and melee troops from the barracks if you wish. Then go heavy ranged troops in Town once you build the Practice Range.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

59 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

completely new playstyle for this civilisation; the previous build orders don't work anymore -> forces you to think about new build orders.

I like the sound of this alot! 

The han do sound pretty OP tho.

Edited February 20, 2022 by real_tabasco_sauce

[Lion.Kanzen]

CC takes time to put on is hard because is slightly larger than normal model.(I know is for the upgrade.)

There should be something visible for reference.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

4 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

How does it nerf eco? How does it nerf early defense? You can train archers from your CC in village phase and melee troops from the barracks if you wish. Then go heavy ranged troops in Town once you build the Practice Range.

I don't think it's that big a nerf tbh. Im fine with some costs and benefits associated with unique civ characteristics. I would say since it slightly limits the available units trainable at one time, assuming you are booming with women from CC and training out of one training building (barracks). Normally, you could already get a mix of melee/ranged inf while women booming in p1, but I guess with han, you would have to build both structures for this. Only having spears until you begin training archers from the CC would put a han player at risk from rushing.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

[Nullus]

There seems to be a new graphics bug in this version. When units die next to or on the water, the water next to them is shaded with the texture underneath the water.

Also, when I start a match with the han, I get this error message: 

Actor props/units/helmets/headband_generic.xml255: required texture sampler specTex not found (material art/materials/player_trans_normal.xml)

 

Edited February 21, 2022 by Nullus

[Nullus]

Testing the latest changes changes with the new cursors, it seems confusing to have the default cursor be a sword, and then the "attack" cursor another kind of sword. The old cursor seemed more straightforward.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

55 minutes ago, Nullus said:

Testing the latest changes changes with the new cursors, it seems confusing to have the default cursor be a sword, and then the "attack" cursor another kind of sword. The old cursor seemed more straightforward.

Default cursor is an arrowhead/spearhead, just like the old one (which was a flint arrowhead). 

[Stan`]

1 hour ago, Nullus said:

Actor props/units/helmets/headband_generic.xml255: required texture sampler specTex not found (material art/materials/player_trans_normal.xml)

Should have been fixed by https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP26443

 Can you check again?

 

[Nullus]

46 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Default cursor is an arrowhead/spearhead, just like the old one (which was a flint arrowhead). 

The way the old cursor was styled, it looked more like a "pointer" than part of a weapon. The new one looks more like an weapon, which is more confusing.

24 minutes ago, Stan` said:

Should have been fixed by https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP26443

I don't get the error any more, thanks!

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

5 minutes ago, Nullus said:

The way the old cursor was styled, it looked more like a "pointer" than part of a weapon. The new one looks more like an weapon, which is more confusing.

A weapon, in an historically themed strategy game. Do you really confuse the default cursor with an attack cursor?

Edited February 21, 2022 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Nullus]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

A weapon, in an historically themed strategy game. Do you really confuse the default cursor with an attack cursor?

I don't find it confusing after playing with it a bit longer. However, it makes more intuitive sense for the default cursor to be a pointer, and the attack cursor to be a weapon. 

[Nullus]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

A weapon, in an historically themed strategy game. Do you really confuse the default cursor with an attack cursor?

I don't find it confusing after playing with it a bit longer. However, it makes more intuitive sense for the default cursor to be a pointer, and the attack cursor to be a weapon. 

[vladislavbelov]

In my opinion the new cursor looks a bit strange, more cartoonish than we had before.

(first mentioned here https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP26448)