Jump to content

Thread for posting suggestions for Alpha 27.


Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

Yeah, what I am saying really shouldn't be controversial...I recall someone calculating the stats for men and they were like 15 feet tall and walked miles as fast as Usain Bolt could run 100M. The simply game isn't to scale. 

A game by nature isn't supposed to be an exact recreation. 

It's hard to tell how those ships scale without other units providing context, but by themselves they look good to me. 

Mainland giant is only a couple of kilometres across. Using realistic values, archers can hit your base from inside their base if you use small or normal map size. Catapults can hit anywhere on the map. 

In order to give the projectiles curvature in trajectory, they used extreme values of gravitational acceleration, 50ms-2. They had to revalue everything to make the game playable in a world with such parameters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sevda said:

Mainland giant is only a couple of kilometres across. Using realistic values, archers can hit your base from inside their base if you use small or normal map size. Catapults can hit anywhere on the map. 

In order to give the projectiles curvature in trajectory, they used extreme values of gravitational acceleration, 50ms-2. They had to revalue everything to make the game playable in a world with such parameters. 

And men can only see the length of a football field while women can only see about 10 feet. There are so many examples of how the game just isn't to scale. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Gurken Khan said:

Sounds are already played when units spawn from their production building.

Yes there is. Just noticed now. Just when everyone around is chopping wood, knocking with pickaxes, rustling with choppers across the field, these sounds are lost against the general background. Maybe make them more contrast?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Ships are large in real life, but 2x the size of a dock?

6 hours ago, chrstgtr said:

It's hard to tell how those ships scale without other units providing context, but by themselves they look good to me. 

So this means that the ships in the game were always not the original size? Those reconstructions of triremes that are on YouTube are not so big in themselves. It turns out that you also shortened them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remembered one very important thing about diplomacy! Due to the fact that the game often slows down and the ally/neutral/enemy buttons are very small and too close to each other, it is possible to accidentally declare war/neutral on an ally. And he instantly becomes an enemy/neutral. What if you do it like in Age of Empires II, when an ally or a neutral, instead of declaring war/neutrality, simply starts to resent, sending messages to the chat with sound, and only after a certain warning declares war or neutrality. At the same time, in Age of Empires II, even with a former ally/neutral, you can still restore the union/neutrality by fulfilling its conditions. And the lower the AI difficulty, the higher the chance to restore neutrality or alliance.

Spoiler
Spoiler
Spoiler
Edited by Mordred
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Mordred said:

Just when everyone around is chopping wood, knocking with pickaxes, rustling with choppers across the field, these sounds are lost against the general background. Maybe make them more contrast?

I never noticed it as being problematic. Maybe you could experiment a bit with your sound settings; for example my "Ambient volume" is set a little lower than others.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 17/08/2022 at 3:47 PM, Tyrannosaurus said:

So are there plans to introduce any new civilizations in Alpha 27? I know 26 is going to add the Han Dynasty.

I think a Germanic or Mesoamerican civilization would be welcome, personally.

it takes time to add a civ/faction.

The current Mayans, for example, are in an alpha version.

They have fun mechanics, like hunters with blowguns, flaming proyectiles, no cavalry.

Still they should work almost consistently.

The same the Xiongnu they lack more mechanics that were not originally designed.

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

  • 3 weeks later...

fire cav will need a buff in a27.

a25 damage per second (without fire):

36 pierce/1.25 sec = 28.8 dps

a26 damage per second (without fire):

25 pierce/1.5 sec = 16.66 dps

compare to CS skirm cav: 14.4 dps

 

Its a bit heavy handed to be honest.

meanwhile chariots still do 36 pierce/1.25 sec = 28.8 dps without boudica!

 

 

Edited by real_tabasco_sauce
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

fire cav will need a buff in a27.

a25 damage per second (without fire):

36 pierce/1.25 sec = 28.8 dps

a26 damage per second (without fire):

25 pierce/1.5 sec = 16.66 dps

compare to CS skirm cav: 14.4 dps

 

Its a bit heavy handed to be honest.

meanwhile chariots still do 36 pierce/1.25 sec = 28.8 dps without boudica!

 

 

Fire cav still does fire dmg. It will be very useful against buildings. But yes, perhaps firecav should have the same interval as regular skirm. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/08/2022 at 12:38 AM, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

I think in a27 we need to add some unit-specific upgrades.

I still have not figured out how to give archers some fire damage as a technology, but here is a tentative set of unit specific upgrades. I don't have any icons, so I just used the clenched fist from will to fight.

You will notice I removed the generic cavalry speed and HP technologies from the stable to make room for this more sophisticated upgrade system.

As far as I have tested, everything works.

This is version 1, but I would like to figure out any other issues before I make a separate topic.

My thoughts are that this is a way to bring increased differentiation to civs and units, while also serving as a balancing tool for difficult balancing cases.

The upgrades do not affect mercenaries or heroes.

Spoiler

 

Level 1

Cost

Level 2

Cost

Pike

+4 range

100f, 100w, 100m

+1 pierce damage, +1.5x cavalry counter

200f, 200w, 200m

sword

+20% movement speed

100f, 100w, 100m

+ 20 hp

200f, 200w, 200m

spear

+ 1 pierce damage

100f, 100w, 100m

+ 15% speed, + 75% acceleration

200f, 200w, 200m

axeman/clubmen

+1 hack armor

100f, 100w, 100m

+30% speed, 50% acceleration -1 pierce armor

200f, 200w, 200m

skirmisher

Increased projectile velocity, accuracy

100f, 100w, 100m

+5 m range

200f, 200w, 200m

slinger

+30% pierce damage +25% crush damage +20% attack repeat time

100f, 100w, 100m

+ 5 range, increased prepare time.

200f, 200w, 200m

archer

+ 1 pierce damage

100f, 100w, 100m

Add small fire damage

200f, 200w, 200m

crossbow

Increased accuracy

100f, 100w, 100m

 

 

-------------

------------------------------------------------

------------

-----------------------------------

-------------

skirmisher cavalry

Increased accuracy, decreased prepare time

100f, 100w, 100m

 

 

archer cavalry

Increased vision range

100f, 100w, 100m

Increased projectile velocity, increased accuracy.

200f, 200w, 200m

sword cavalry

+ 25 hp

100f, 100w, 100m

+ 1 pierce armor

200f, 200w, 200m

spear cavalry

+20 m/s*s acceleration

100f, 100w, 100m

Near Instant prep time, + 1 pierce damage.

200f, 200w, 200m

axe cavlalry

Increased damage increase repeat time

100f, 100w, 100m

+2 m/s speed, +10 m/s acceleration

200f, 200w, 200m

I will make a patch too, and we will probably need to adjust some costs/values but at the moment it looks pretty exciting.

Edited by real_tabasco_sauce
remove old version, see topic for more
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

I still have not figured out how to give archers some fire damage as a technology

I haven't figured out how to edit the burning status effect that fire cav have, but you can add a fire damage tech like this.

First, give the archer template a fire damage slot and set it to 0 to make it inactive. The corresponding code in the template is:

      <Damage>
        <Pierce>6.7</Pierce>
        <Fire>0</Fire>
      </Damage>

Then create the tech to increase the fire damage. The modifications section of the tech should look like

    "modifications": [
        { "value": "Attack/Ranged/Damage/Fire", "add": 1 },
    ]

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

here is a tentative set of unit specific upgrades.

I dislike the idea of unit specific upgrades.

Naturally there will be units that are more useful and those who are less useful. Player are most likely to prioritize the upgrades for the units that are most useful. So if you have researched the technologies of the units that are most useful, then why should you make a unit that:

1. has less overal usefulness.

2. requires some additional upgrades to reach its full effectiveness.

 

My worry is that it tends to lead to less diversity and it makes thing more complicated without actual benefit to gameplay. It can help for balancing, but we could use other methods (like faction specific bonusses) for balancing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, LetswaveaBook said:

I dislike the idea of unit specific upgrades.

Naturally there will be units that are more useful and those who are less useful. Player are most likely to prioritize the upgrades for the units that are most useful. So if you have researched the technologies of the units that are most useful, then why should you make a unit that:

1. has less overal usefulness.

2. requires some additional upgrades to reach its full effectiveness.

 

My worry is that it tends to lead to less diversity and it makes thing more complicated without actual benefit to gameplay. It can help for balancing, but we could use other methods (like faction specific bonusses) for balancing.

Keep in mind that it is a goal to have units properly balanced so that all are useful. @real_tabasco_sauce worked together to come up with the upgrades, and all the work to implement them was his. We designed each upgrade to provide a bonus to that unit that can sometimes be very useful. The idea is not to simply buy each upgrade every game like the current blacksmith upgrades, but to buy the ones you plan to make use of. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, LetswaveaBook said:

First, give the archer template a fire damage slot and set it to 0 to make it inactive. The corresponding code in the template is:

      <Damage>
        <Pierce>6.7</Pierce>
        <Fire>0</Fire>
      </Damage>

Then create the tech to increase the fire damage. The modifications section of the tech should look like

    "modifications": [
        { "value": "Attack/Ranged/Damage/Fire", "add": 1 },
    ]

Thanks for the tip!

Also @LetswaveaBook I understand your arguments but maybe let me explain a couple of other things before you make your mind up.

1. Not every unit from every civ receives these. Each civ gets anywhere from 4 to 8 of these upgrades.

2. The forge upgrades have a much more powerful effect on overall gameplay, and the point of this patch is to somewhat dismantle the dominance of the forge arms race. Instead, I would like to see players consider their options and the way these upgrades might give them the upper hand against their enemy. Better adjusting the costs could make this an important decision to make.

3. I have given these unit specific upgrades to factions in such a way as to make the currently least used units more viable.

4. The upgrades diversify units: Take for example the first spear cavalry upgrade. This increase in acceleration changes the behavior of spearcav to make chasing ranged cavalry much more effective. The second upgrade does something more impactful, but notice I have not given it to gauls, persia, or sele which have crazy spear cav champs.

5. 

6 hours ago, LetswaveaBook said:

Naturally there will be units that are more useful and those who are less useful. Player are most likely to prioritize the upgrades for the units that are most useful. So if you have researched the technologies of the units that are most useful, then why should you make a unit that:

1. has less overal usefulness.

2. requires some additional upgrades to reach its full effectiveness.

lastly, this is actually an excellent gameplay feature. When players pick upgrades, for example, to fully maximize their ranged attack and pierce armor (meat shield meta) they have an enormous weakness that can be exploited not only by making units that counter the enemy's but also by researching upgrades (in this case swords and hack damage perhaps). This is found in other RTS games, including 0AD. It is part of the strategy.

I wouldn't say its that complicated. It's just more content really.

Edited by real_tabasco_sauce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

2. The forge upgrades have a much more powerful effect on overall gameplay, and the point of this patch is to somewhat dismantle the dominance of the forge arms race. Instead, I would like to see players consider their options and the way these upgrades might give them the upper hand against their enemy. Better adjusting the costs could make this an important decision to make.

 

Not to long ago the forge techs were simplified to make it easier to switch rooster, now you want the opposite. Care to elaborate why this was fundamentally the wrong direction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, hyperion said:

Not to long ago the forge techs were simplified to make it easier to switch rooster, now you want the opposite. Care to elaborate why this was fundamentally the wrong direction?

image.png.d3ff53621c497d6d2be36e4d228ac7c8.png

^forgive me, I had to XD.

In all seriousness, these upgrades make much less impact than the general damage/armor hikes. Instead, they are ways to differentiate units into roles as desired.

It was not the wrong direction btw, the blacksmith was absolutely full of upgrades, and it they were very, very expensive. It is much better the way it is, more streamlined, straightforward.

I would say these upgrades are much more interesting and logical than pre a23 forge technologies. They are also pretty cheap, so doing a composition switch is absolutely possible. (in fact, this makes them more impactful).

Lastly, I would like anyone commenting to please actually download the mod, and back up what you are saying with what you have found in the mod.

 

*btw I made a seperate topic for this: 

https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/93787-unit-specific-upgrades/

Edited by real_tabasco_sauce
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@hyperion 

  • these are not blacksmith techs, and do not replace the general upgrades that players get every game
  • these upgrades are not mandatory in all circumstances prior to using the unit, they are meant to reward players who are intentional with their unit choices
  • the upgrades before that forge rework were problematic for a variety of other reasons, and you must also consider how limited metal was in those times and how expensive those upgrades were. 
  • where blacksmith techs used to be the main thing standing in the way of transitioning from infantry to cavalry, now it is stables, so the situation is different in a number of ways
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 22/05/2022 at 9:30 PM, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:
  • giving melee cavalry .5x counter versus palisades. This gives a defending player more time to bring in infantry, but does not make palisades stronger versus infantry and rams; units that don't have the same raiding capability that palisades are intended to protect against.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, definitely something that would improve the use of defenses without being unbalancing.

Great idea !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I would like to see is a realistic treatment of women.

There are women in the game, but civilizations of the first millennium varied enormously on what women could and could not do, it would be nice to that reflected in the game mechanisms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, LienRag said:

What I would like to see is a realistic treatment of women.

There are women in the game, but civilizations of the first millennium varied enormously on what women could and could not do, it would be nice to that reflected in the game mechanisms.

Like what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/05/2022 at 4:10 PM, real_tabasco_sauce said:
  1. Better to increase their dps to match slingers. The only way I could see this being a little balanced is as a p3 unique tech
  2. To be honest I like the fast paced fighting, but to each their own.

Crossbowmens' main advantage historically was their range (and the reduced training they needed).

It's reasonable that slingers would provide more damage, but it's entirely unreasonable that they would have the same range than crossbowmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LienRag said:

Crossbowmens' main advantage historically was their range (and the reduced training they needed).

It's reasonable that slingers would provide more damage, but it's entirely unreasonable that they would have the same range than crossbowmen.

that treatment would be interesting but only some features.

In the Lusitanians mod the village girls can upgrade to woman swordwoman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...