Fixing Chinese Han

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

30 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

Fair. Restrictions have their place. I’m more just against Every. Single. Civ. looking exactly the same and then calling that an “innovative change” when really it is just a “change” that makes things more uniform and restrictive. Making something new while taking away something old leaves us with the same amount of stuff (no need to rehash the stable complaints of a24, but thats a good example of where we went from 2 buildings that can make cav to 1 building that can make cav. That doesn’t increase diversity)

Hmm, I think there is a basic roster of buildings that can be the same. Establishes a "base" gameplay for the game. And then you add diversity and uniqueness on top of that. So, barracks/stables/ranges for unit training differentiation as a "standard" for the game's civs. And then you diversify on top of that. Right now it's hard to see where to go from there if you considered Ranges and Stables as "special buildings." If you look at it that way, then yeah, you've given every civ the same "special", which makes it not special at all. Fair enough. I'm just looking at it from a broader perspective. So, if all civs have barracks/stables/ranges, for the Persians then we make the "Apadana" more interesting and unique (you upgrade it to different versions that trickle different resources after researching "Satrapy Tribute"), and maybe add the "Yakhchal" Ice Houses that give a bonus when built. The Athenians, then, we look at the Prytaneion and Gymnasium and see how we can make those more interesting. Maybe give them a "Stoa" special building as in Delenda Est. For the Carthaginians, implement the "unlocking mercenaries" concept for the Embassies. Point is, just because you give every civ an archery range doesn't mean it's the end of history.  

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

37 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

and if a speed training bonus is given?

I say bring the champions back to the Fortress.

 

32 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

How many alphas until we’ve reversed all the changes and are at a23 with a couple unit stat adjustments?

There were a few things A23 did better than A24 for sure, but I wouldn't say just go back to it wholesale.  

I too prefer Champions in the Fortress, with the exception of Han, Spart, Pers, and Athen who have their own unique champion buildings, but I like that every civ has the Arsenal (aka "Siege Workshop"). I don't like champions in the barracks. I can see using that as a special for a civ or 2 though. As you know, I really like building differentiation. Everything having its function.  

[chrstgtr]

32 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

here were a few things A23 did better than A24 for sure, but I wouldn't say just go back to it wholesale.  

I’m being facetious. In all seriousness, though, with the exception of some unit balancing, which still isn’t perfect, and a few random changes, such as the field changes, most of the proposed changes over the last 2 alphas seem aimed to aimed at undoing a lot of a24. 
 

Edit: I see you spent a lot of time typing, so I’ll actually address. I liked champ buildings in a23, but I’m not heartbroken over the state of it now. 
Globalizing the siege workshop is actually one of the things I really disliked from a23–>a24 was the siege workshop because it made Mace way less unique (ie they no longer have the unique quick p3 and siege rush strat). It makes more sense now, but it came at the cost of civ differentiation 

 

edit 2: of course there is also the occasional person who just wants to delete every feature that isn’t perfect. 

Edited February 23, 2022 by chrstgtr

[Lion.Kanzen]

3 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

I’m being facetious. In all seriousness, though, with the exception of some unit balancing, which still isn’t perfect, and a few random changes, such as the field changes, most of the proposed changes over the last 2 alphas seem aimed to aimed at undoing a lot of a24. 

almost all of those horrible changes from A24, were done in months.

[chrstgtr]

35 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Hmm, I think there is a basic roster of buildings that can be the same. Establishes a "base" gameplay for the game. And then you add diversity and uniqueness on top of that. So, barracks/stables/ranges for unit training differentiation as a "standard" for the game's civs. And then you diversify on top of that. Right now it's hard to see where to go from there if you considered Ranges and Stables as "special buildings." If you look at it that way, then yeah, you've given every civ the same "special", which makes it not special at all. Fair enough. I'm just looking at it from a broader perspective. So, if all civs have barracks/stables/ranges, for the Persians then we make the "Apadana" more interesting and unique (you upgrade it to different versions that trickle different resources after researching "Satrapy Tribute"), and maybe add the "Yakhchal" Ice Houses that give a bonus when built. The Athenians, then, we look at the Prytaneion and Gymnasium and see how we can make those more interesting. Maybe give them a "Stoa" special building as in Delenda Est. For the Carthaginians, implement the "unlocking mercenaries" concept for the Embassies. Point is, just because you give every civ an archery range doesn't mean it's the end of history.  

Different approaches to the same goal. I also don’t think our approaches are mutually exclusive

[Lion.Kanzen]

that's how people agree.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Hello everyone. Please be kind: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/26469

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Hello everyone. Please be kind: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/26469

tomorrow I will test it.

[Yekaterina]

The crossbow walkspeed needs to be faster, otherwise this civ booms too slowly. 

To be honest, crossbows with this stat + spearman makes this civ very vulnerable to early rushes... at least give them an archer option for P1. 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

18 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

The crossbow walkspeed needs to be faster, otherwise this civ booms too slowly. 

To be honest, crossbows with this stat + spearman makes this civ very vulnerable to early rushes... at least give them an archer option for P1. 

Cavalry Archer work?

[Yekaterina]

Just now, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Cavalry Archer work?

No, I mean, their infantry is too weak on P1, which means a small infantry push from the enemy will be able to kill the civ completely. They need some serious ranged output, which is why I suggested crossbow to have identical stats to slingers

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

7 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

No, I mean, their infantry is too weak on P1, which means a small infantry push from the enemy will be able to kill the civ completely. They need some serious ranged output, which is why I suggested crossbow to have identical stats to slingers

Crossbow dps is 6.67 pierce (with special techs it grows to 13.33, then 20). What is a slinger's dps?

Edited February 24, 2022 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[real_tabasco_sauce]

Why not just make crossbows a p2 unit and have Han start with archers. Similar to how some civs start with spears in p1 and get pikes, slower, in p2. Mace and ptol have pikes p1 and people tend to avoid training them at first because of their walk speed.

If the archery range were still considered, I would say my solution from a previous post solves this aswell.

Also, I think crossbows seem more fitting as a p2 unit as bows must have come first.

[Lion.Kanzen]

the feeling of crossbow are good now.

[LetswaveaBook]

On 20/02/2022 at 10:55 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

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. 

For the smaller farms and higher cost, we also need to consider the full cost per farming lady. We need 50 food for the woman, 20 wood for 1/5th of a farm and 15 wood 1/5th of a small house and there is thus 16 seconds build time. All of that adds to a cost of 50 food, 35 wood and 16 seconds of build time. For Han the cost are 50 food, 48.33 wood and 22.66 build time. Not only the wood cost, but also the build time each worker needs to do is increased. I don't think it gives a comfortable early economy.

When other factions place 3 farms for 300 wood and 150 seconds build time and research the farming tech, the Han need to place 5 rice paddies for 500 wood and 250 seconds build time and thus lack the wood for the farming tech early on.

 

If we ignore the ministers, this faction has similarities with Persians. Persians also get the 10% more pop and the Persian palace also gives resource tickle worth 3 population. Persians have a very strong lategame, but they start with archers/crossbows. Persians are not a good 1v1 and are below average. Ptolemies and Iberians are way better than the average faction. I don't expect Han in 1v1s to be more potent than Ptolemies or Iberians, unless these factions receive major nerfs.

[Yekaterina]

1 minute ago, LetswaveaBook said:

more potent than Ptolemies or Iberians, unless these factions receive major nerfs.

That's a very gentle way to put it, 12 camels or 15 slingers at min 5 and it's gg

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

@LetswaveaBook honestly I think the cost and build time should be the same, as well as farmer occupancy. The reduced area is a fine bonus and will make it easier to manage and defend Han farming eco.

My estimation is that if farms cost extra wood, that Han will have to wait for food eco if they have no extra berries or hunt in p1. It would be a huge disadvantage to have to wait to collect wood to build the extra farms. We don’t want a civ design to add to the disadvantage of 0 starting food bonus res.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Guys...............................................

 

Han Rice Paddies are 60 wood and 30 build time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reassess. 

[chrstgtr]

40 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Guys...............................................

 

Han Rice Paddies are 60 wood and 30 build time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reassess. 

I haven’t played them. But I’m sure by the time I do they’ll be the same as every other civ. Perfect (lazy) balance 

[faction02]

On 22/02/2022 at 11:26 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

3. Civic Center/Starting Units:  A unique mix.

• Spearman
• Crossbowman
• Sword Cavalry

I hope someone will have a better knowledge than me about 0ad balancing history, but I remember people talking about the fact that sword cavalry used to be a P1 unit but it was too op and therefore moved to p2.

The old issue might have been indirectly fixed but maybe someone still around will remember what was exactly wrong with sword cavalry in P1 to help check what could go wrong again?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

I'll make a poll for starting phase 1 units. I'm now thinking Swordsman, Archer, Cavalry Archer. But others may have a better starting roster.

 

 

Edited February 25, 2022 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[AIEND]

I have to point out that the Han Dynasty did not have the repeating crossbow, it was a weapon that appeared more than a thousand years later, and the Han army did not like to use the crossbow on the horse, and the Han cavalry and chariots used the bow. Therefore, there should be no cavalry and repeaters using crossbows in the game.

[AIEND]

As I said in another post, the staple food of the Han Dynasty people was millet (粟Su), so the fields should be millet fields.
The extra range is not a good idea, the borg mod for alpha 23 gave me a bad experience, build another building to get the shooter, take up more land (which makes the town very crowded) waste of money but not better gaming experience.

Soldiers starting at P1 are best to use swordsmen, crossbowmen or archers, swords  cavalry.

I heard that the champion troops of the Han Dynasty will be put into a special academy building for training, right? How many champion units are there now?

Edited February 25, 2022 by AIEND

[AIEND]

Han soldiers using crossbows only need two kinds, one citizen soldier can be placed in P1, and the other champion can be placed in P3.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

3 hours ago, AIEND said:

As I said in another post, the staple food of the Han Dynasty people was millet (粟Su), so the fields should be millet fields.
The extra range is not a good idea, the borg mod for alpha 23 gave me a bad experience, build another building to get the shooter, take up more land (which makes the town very crowded) waste of money but not better gaming experience.

Soldiers starting at P1 are best to use swordsmen, crossbowmen or archers, swords  cavalry.

 

 

2 hours ago, AIEND said:

Han soldiers using crossbows only need two kinds, one citizen soldier can be placed in P1, and the other champion can be placed in P3.

These things can be done.

• The millet fields might have to wait, because it needs more art.
• I can remove the Cavalry Crossbowman, no problem.
• Make the Chariot rider an archer instead of crossbowman.
• I already removed the Practice Range earlier this week, so no worries there.
• Remove the "Repeating Crossbows" tech. I always knew it was anachronistic.  Perhaps a different special tech for the Forge? "Differential Quenching"?  

 

 

Quote

I heard that the champion troops of the Han Dynasty will be put into a special academy building for training, right? How many champion units are there now?

I would like to see some justification for a Champion Swordsman. Right now, the unit looks very cool. These are what we have right now:

 

Spoiler