"Arson" attacks should be added to cavalry and infantry.

[AIEND]

2 hours ago, davidsrsb said:

弹射器或投石机要贵得多，而且是高科技武器

公羊的缺点是必须到达目标，所以它需要大量的步兵支援才能存活很长时间。

几辆无人公羊迅速将一座全载人堡垒夷为平地的 0AD 模型大错特错。 （或不受支持的大象相同的论点）

弹射器主要被火灾损坏

Yes, the destructive power of battering rams and elephants to buildings is too high, so that the difference between low-tech weapons and high-tech weapons in siege weapons cannot be reflected, especially battering rams, siege towers and catapults are P3 unlocked.
There's another reason, whether it's a CC or a fort, these buildings require too many soldiers to have enough firepower, causing you to think twice about letting the garrison leave the building to attack the battering ram, as this will significantly weaken Building firepower. And the enemy's troops covering the battering ram can in turn eliminate the soldiers you leave the building's protection when the threat of the building's firepower diminishes. It is also very necessary to increase the base firepower of the defensive buildings, to put it mildly, the firepower of CCs, towers and fortresses should be at least doubled without any garrison.

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

The system in aoe3 and 4 is primarily to satisfy people who care a lot about realism in the game, it does not add very much gameplay value. 
 

As far as designing one for 0ad I would say be careful not to displace the roles of units such as slingers, club men,hyrcanian cavalry, and axemen and firecav. These units take on buildings in unique situations and adding a basic arson capability to most units would render these specialties useless.

Another issue is different units resistance to cc arrows. Obviously skirmishers will die in a fraction of the time it takes a pikeman to die from cc arrows. If the arson mechanic is balanced for spearmen, then it will be OP for pikemen who won’t take losses while burning the building.

[Gurken Khan]

1 hour ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

The system in aoe3 and 4 is primarily to satisfy people who care a lot about realism in the game, it does not add very much gameplay value. 

'Realism' as in historically correct?

[hyperion]

4 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

The system in aoe3 and 4 is primarily to satisfy people who care a lot about realism in the game, it does not add very much gameplay value. 

You can give units whatever damage profile you like, arson is just visuals. It's certainly not conceivable that units would carry torches and lighters around, so I see this as a request to replace the somewhat lame capture delete with something more pleasing and setting fires and seeing buildings burn sounds at least great on paper. Blowing buildings into the sky with ultra sonic cannons might also be fun, just that this is hard to argue for in this setting.

 

Edit: fix hard to understand typo.

Edited April 13, 2022 by hyperion

[AIEND]

6 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

aoe3和4中的系统主要是为了满足那些在游戏中非常注重真实感的人，并没有增加太多的游戏价值。

The greatest value of arson is to reflect the unit's ability to attack cities in a more reasonable form. Age of Empires 2 and Age of Mythology did not have arson, but many units (especially melee units) can still cause huge damage to buildings.

6 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

至于为 0ad 设计一个，我会说小心不要取代诸如投石手、俱乐部成员、赫卡尼亚骑兵、斧兵和火骑兵等单位的角色。 这些单位在独特的情况下承担建筑物，并为大多数单位增加基本的纵火能力将使这些专业无用。

In fact, the general arson capability is a means of addressing the current irrational positioning of some units. I have already mentioned the issue of the fire cavalry in another post, and the slinger is more representative. The reason why the current version gives it crush damage is that some people do not want this unit to become useless, not to conform to reality. (Obviously throwing a cobblestone can't cause any substantial damage to the building. There were no glass windows in ancient times, and you couldn't do it if you wanted to smash the glass).

6 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

另一个问题是对 cc 箭头的不同单位阻力。 显然，散兵会在长枪手死于 cc 箭的时间的一小部分内死亡。 如果纵火机制对于长矛兵来说是平衡的，那么对于在烧毁建筑物时不会遭受损失的长矛兵来说，这将是 OP。

The problem is that the pikeman's high armor is unreasonable. This problem has existed for a long time and needs to be solved, whether or not arson is added.

Because even if it is not arson, pikeman can also resist more damage from more arrows from CC when capturing buildings, and light infantry will still be quickly killed by arrows from buildings.
Capture and arson are no different in this regard, as both are close-range attacks.

[faction02]

On 11/04/2022 at 5:29 PM, AIEND said:

Yes, the destructive power of battering rams and elephants to buildings is too high, so that the difference between low-tech weapons and high-tech weapons in siege weapons cannot be reflected, especially battering rams, siege towers and catapults are P3 unlocked.

Citizen-Soldiers makes many of the existing features of other games not suited for 0ad. Sieges needs to be able to destroy buildings relatively fast. Whereas in other game keeping some military units idle to protect your sieges is perfectly fine, in 0ad, it has an opportunity cost since every idle citizen-soldiers could instead be collecting resources.

On 11/04/2022 at 12:20 AM, AIEND said:

I weakened the attack and HP of the rams in the mod, and changed the piercing damage of the melee infantry to hack damage, so that the infantry can complete this task. 

For the same reason, having sieges units being effective is quite important in 0ad. A failed attacked in which siege units are all destroyed has a huge economic cost, citizen soldiers could have collected resources for a very long time instead of walking to the enemy, supporting the siege units, walking back to the base. Currently killing a civic center protected by 20 champions swordmen and a good micro using rams is close to impossible, sieges will die much faster than the champions.

[AIEND]

6分钟前，faction02 说道：

Citizen-Soldiers 使其他游戏的许多现有功能不适合 0ad。 围攻需要能够相对快速地摧毁建筑物。 而在其他游戏中，让一些军事单位闲置以保护你的围城完全没问题，但在 0ad 中，它具有机会成本，因为每个闲置的公民士兵都可以收集资源。

出于同样的原因，让攻城单位有效在 0ad 中非常重要。 攻城部队全灭的失败进攻，经济代价巨大，市民士兵本可以收集资源很长一段时间，而不是走到敌人身边，支援攻城部队，走回基地。 目前杀死一个由 20 个冠军剑客保护的市政中心和一个使用公羊的好微几乎是不可能的，围攻会比冠军死得更快。

Soldiers sent to fight will not actually be counted in the labor population. After the game enters a certain stage, soldiers with at least 100 people need to be constantly mobilized and cannot all be put into labor, especially after gaining experience in battle, they labor capacity will decline.

The complete destruction of the main force in other games will also bring you into a disaster, because even if your economy is intact, the enemy cannot wait for you to train a new army.
Similarly, when you can attack the opponent's CC, you should have an absolute advantage. You have destroyed the opponent's main force and demolished most of his barracks buildings. At this time, there are only 20 swordsmen in the opponent's CC. What can be done?
In my opinion, it would be strange if players with 0 A D made it the norm to recklessly attack CC regardless of other threats. If you can't beat the opposing armies and make sure to push the line close enough to the opposing CC, then you should bombard them with catapults.

[davidsrsb]

6 hours ago, AIEND said:

The problem is that the pikeman's high armor is unreasonable. This problem has existed for a long time and needs to be solved, whether or not arson is added.

Why is it a problem? It is historically correct. The real world penalties were cost, training time and that they were slow, vulnerable to attack from behind

[AIEND]

58 minutes ago, davidsrsb said:

为什么会出现问题？ 这在历史上是正确的。 现实世界的惩罚是成本、训练时间，而且它们很慢，容易受到来自背后的攻击

The pikeman itself is a "light soldier" who gives up part of the armor and shield in order to use a longer weapon. Compared with the hoplites, pikeman training is faster and cheaper.
Because Macedonia did not have enough wealthy citizens to form the well-armed and numerous hoplites of Athens.
The pikeman's sluggishness is due to the fact that they have to keep the formation intact, as their overly long weapons make them less capable of fighting alone.
But that doesn't mean that their weapons are heavy (compared to the larger bronze shields and bronze armor of hoplites), we Chinese know pike very well. Although this weapon looks long, it is very flexible if it is made well. The main load is armor.

Edited April 13, 2022 by AIEND

[real_tabasco_sauce]

I could see this being more favorable than capturing and deleting houses, but only as a visual change. In other words, the time to destroy a house with torches should be the same as if you were capturing. However, it doesn't make sense for CCs, Forts and towers. Overall, I would consider this feature not worthwhile.

Edited April 13, 2022 by real_tabasco_sauce

[AIEND]

24 分钟前，real_tabasco_sauce 说：

我可以看到这比捕获和删除房屋更有利，但这只是视觉上的变化。 换句话说，用火把摧毁房子的时间应该和你捕捉的时间一样。 但是，它对 CC、堡垒和塔没有意义。 总的来说，我认为这个功能不值得。

Not so, adding arson means that soldiers can effectively destroy buildings that cannot be captured because of the garrison, and when you have enough soldiers, you can also burn the CC.
In other words arson does not equate to capture, because soldiers can do the same damage to buildings (like barracks and temples) whether they have garrisoned troops or not.

And the rate at which arson damages a building depends on the building materials used for that building, an unprotected temple built entirely of stone would be more fire resistant than a tower that is half wood and half stone.

Edited April 13, 2022 by AIEND

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

I agree with @faction02 that the citizen soldier system makes this a much more complicated thing to balance. There is still plenty of unfinished business with this next alpha like CS skirmcav. 

@AIEND I would be fine with such a system and would test a mod if one was made. I just think it is very important to consider the current anti-building units and the overall balance of strategies.

[AIEND]

1 minute ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

我同意 @faction02 ，即公民士兵系统使平衡变得更加复杂。 像 CS skirmcav 这样的下一个 alpha 版本还有很多未完成的工作。  

@AIEND 我会很好地使用这样的系统，如果制作了一个mod，我会测试它。 我只是觉得考虑当前的反建单位和策略的整体平衡是非常重要的。

Regarding balance, I suggest you try the mods I made first, I have already completed some ideas https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/76607-明镜-mirror/

 

[LetswaveaBook]

6 hours ago, faction02 said:

Citizen-Soldiers makes many of the existing features of other games not suited for 0ad. Sieges needs to be able to destroy buildings relatively fast. Whereas in other game keeping some military units idle to protect your sieges is perfectly fine,

6 hours ago, faction02 said:

For the same reason, having sieges units being effective is quite important in 0ad.

I disagree with @BreakfastBurrito_007 and @faction02 that the CS system makes siege units more important. In most RTS games, an idle army is wasted time and is a serious limitation to your chances to win. In 0ad an attack does not need siege units to be effective.

 

2 hours ago, davidsrsb said:

Why is it a problem? It is historically correct. The real world penalties were cost, training time and that they were slow, vulnerable to attack from behind

Pikemen weren´t well protected so the high armor values doesn´t seems historically correct IMHO. The main protection of a group of pikeman was that undisciplined soldiers don´t want to walk towards a wall of pikes.

 

Personally, I am no fan of adding arson to the game and I prefer the capture mechanic. The capture-delete mechanic is not a great design choice. Maybe instead of deleting buildings, a player should be able to set his own buildings on fire to slowly destroy it instead of instantly deleting them.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

20 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Maybe instead of deleting buildings, a player should be able to set his own buildings on fire to slowly destroy it instead of instantly deleting them.

Now this is a good thought. Perhaps destroying your own buildings using delete should take some time. A constant fire damage would work fine, 100 or 200 hp/sec. Maybe in theory, the buildings could be captured and then repaired if you were really quick.

I think it satisfies the issues with capture-delete in an elegant and unique fashion.

Edited April 13, 2022 by real_tabasco_sauce

[Gurken Khan]

13 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Personally, I am no fan of adding arson to the game and I prefer the capture mechanic. The capture-delete mechanic is not a great design choice. Maybe instead of deleting buildings, a player should be able to set his own buildings on fire to slowly destroy it instead of instantly deleting them.

Players shan't be able to set enemies' buildings on fire but should have to do so with their own?

[AIEND]

21 分钟前，LetswaveaBook 说道：

就个人而言，我不喜欢在游戏中添加纵火，我更喜欢捕获机制。 捕获-删除机制不是一个很好的设计选择。 也许不是删除建筑物，玩家应该能够将自己的建筑物点燃以缓慢地摧毁它，而不是立即删除它们。

In fact, rather than burning down my own buildings, I prefer to have a setting similar to Command and Conquer that demolishes buildings and recycles half of the material cost. Of course, it is also unreasonable for the demolition process to take less than 10 seconds. (if the building is bigger and more complex, it will take longer to demolish it).

Edited April 13, 2022 by AIEND

[real_tabasco_sauce]

21 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

In 0ad an attack does not need siege units to be effective.

no but it is massively important. Siege and eles are a leverage you can use to force enemies to come to your army. Thats why they are rarely effective by themselves.

[davidsrsb]

5 hours ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Pikemen weren´t well protected so the high armor values doesn´t seems historically correct IMHO. The main protection of a group of pikeman was that undisciplined soldiers don´t want to walk towards a wall of pikes.

So their protection against ranged weapons is too high. The protection against held pierce or hack should be good.

[AIEND]

4 小时前，davidsrsb 说：

所以他们对远程武器的保护太高了。 防止刺穿或黑客攻击的保护应该很好。

Pikemen also have too much protection against melee weapons. In fact, once the enemy breaks through the pike and gets close to the pikemen, the pikemen will easily fall into a situation where they can't fight back and be slaughtered by the enemy. This was fully demonstrated in the Macedonian and Roman wars.

Edited April 14, 2022 by AIEND

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

The problem is there is currently no way to simulate the "pinning" effect of pikes. The only way currently is to give them a lot of hack armor.

[chrstgtr]

14 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

The problem is there is currently no way to simulate the "pinning" effect of pikes. The only way currently is to give them a lot of hack armor.

Could you not just give them an aura that makes close enemy units slow?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

4 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

Could you not just give them an aura that makes close enemy units slow?

For Delenda Est? Yes. For Empires Ascendant? Probably would be deemed "too slow." 

[Feldfeld]

What about a snare status effect? A unit that gets hit by a pikeman gets slowed down for some time. And the same thing could be given to spearman to help vs cavalry but compensated with some stat reduction with respect to infantry swordman.

[AIEND]

6 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

问题是目前没有办法模拟长矛的“钉住”效果。 目前唯一的办法就是给他们大量的黑客盔甲。

The pikeman's melee defense tends to go to two extremes. If the enemy can't get close, it can't cause a little damage to the pikeman. If the enemy is close, the pikeman has almost no ability to defend.
My idea is to first trim and take an intermediate state, reduce the defense by 1 point on the basis of the spearman, and then give it a better melee defense gain on the front through the formation, and reduce the travel speed (I think if you do not enter the formation, a single pikeman will not go any slower than the spearman).
The other is to properly increase the damage of pikeman. After all, they use both hands to hold pike, and the damage of stab is definitely higher.