Jump to content

Thread for posting suggestions for Alpha 27.


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, AIEND said:

The public baths were more representative of Roman concepts of social life, such as egalitarianism and civic participation in politics.
But it's not very suitable for medical technology, because the sanitary conditions of public bathrooms are not as good as we think, and for those injured by weapons, public bathrooms often lead to bacterial infection of wounds.

the problem is how to represent that, of social status in the game.

Happiness (?), for me happiness is = better bonus of something. I always give the HP bonus, in other moment to the stats (for soldiers).

 

I am working on the religion of the game, The cultural part of religion, I mean... the psychological side.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

问题是如何在游戏中表现社会地位。

幸福(?),对我来说幸福是=更好的奖励。 我总是给 HP 奖励,其他时候给统计数据(对于士兵)。

 

我正在研究游戏的宗教,宗教的文化部分,我的意思是......心理方面。

Generally speaking, this kind of macro concept is more difficult to reflect. For example, I designed this for Athenians in the mod, when you build a prytaneion, this building will provide a global aura called "Democracy", which reduces the training time of Athenian civic soldiers by 20%. Because in my opinion, the more rights citizens have, the more actively they will participate in national affairs, including wars.

The Romans' public baths are actually somewhat similar to the Spartans' public dining halls, but the latter being used as a military camp seems odd to me, and I think these types of facilities should provide some kind of overall effect.

Edited by AIEND
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LetswaveaBook said:

I think it would be nice to introduce some features that represent the culture of certain factions.

An idea would be the Roman bathhouses. The in game effect could be similar to the technology living condition where garrisoned units regain HP.

I certainly think wonder differentiation could in part fulfill this role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LetswaveaBook said:

I think it would be nice to introduce some features that represent the culture of certain factions.

An idea would be the Roman bathhouses. The in game effect could be similar to the technology living condition where garrisoned units regain HP.

Thing is we already have temples, so another unique healing station while nice for eye candy will simply be redundant, also not really relevant to the function, a stronger fit is to tie a health bonus to the building because cleanliness means less disease so healthier people. Also they usually had gymnasiums attached. So a health bonus overall seems most appropriate. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/04/2022 at 11:00 AM, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Economy score rework:

Economy score = resources gathered resources spent

 

separate statistic in summary screen:

Value ratio = military score / economy score

(shows player skill, if some units are super OP like merc cav, player unit composition, overall effectiveness)

 

Also, the latter value would show how impactful a rush is in the early game with the same weight (since an early game ratio and a late game ratio are still each ratios)

Thoughts on this change?

I think this would be good tbh. It helps show more relevant statistics for who won the game. It might help players improve too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if it might be possible to have a military score that incorporated kill:death ratio into the score. Say you get an increasing # of bonus points for having an increasingly positive ratio. In 1v1 games, it wouldn't make a difference. But for team games, esp. 4v4, it would do a lot more to show that a player who kills 400 units and loses 350 did a lot worse than a player who kills 375 units and loses 100. Whereas now the worse player gets the higher military score.

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

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, thephilosopher said:

I wonder if it might be possible to have a military score that incorporated kill:death ratio into the score. Say you get an increasing # of bonus points for having an increasingly positive ratio. In 1v1 games, it wouldn't make a difference. But for team games, esp. 4v4, it would do a lot more to show that a player who kills 400 units and loses 350 did a lot worse than a player who kills 375 units and loses 100. Whereas now the worse player gets the higher military score.

@Freagarach

@maroder

@Langbart

maybe someone of them knows.

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

17 minutes ago, thephilosopher said:

But for team games, esp. 4v4, it would do a lot more to show that a player who kills 400 units and loses 350 did a lot worse than a player who kills 375 units and loses 100. Whereas now the worse player gets the higher military score.

I think the player killing the 400 enemies performs better. Strength is how much trouble your opponents can throw while they are still unable to take you out.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, thephilosopher said:

400 units and loses 350 did a lot worse than a player who kills 375 units and loses 100.

This could be good, but I think k/d ratio is better off as a standalone statistic. In the value ratio I suggested, the player who only lost 100 units would have a higher value ratio because the 100 units likely cost less. 

I think it is perfectly acceptable to win even with a low KD.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, LetswaveaBook said:

I think the player killing the 400 enemies performs better. Strength is how much trouble your opponents can throw while they are still unable to take you out.

That seems fair enough. You might be right about that. My thought on it was that the 375/100 player was probably doing the most strategic damage, while the 400/350 player was more of a team meat shield. But there could be situations where the 400 kills player was the better player.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, thephilosopher said:

That seems fair enough. You might be right about that. My thought on it was that the 375/100 player was probably doing the most strategic damage, while the 400/350 player was more of a team meat shield. But there could be situations where the 400 kills player was the better player.

K/D ratio does depend on tactics employed by the player. Someone who gets bogged down in a war of attrition with a player who can trade well is going to have a different K/D to someone who can just run over an opponent without any opposition. It is possible to overwhelm and win by sheer numbers just as much as it is possible to annihilate an opponent with minimal losses in pitched battles. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

This could be good, but I think k/d ratio is better off as a standalone statistic. In the value ratio I suggested, the player who only lost 100 units would have a higher value ratio because the 100 units likely cost less. 

I think it is perfectly acceptable to win even with a low KD.

I would much prefer if the K/D statistic is left alone and you just add other stats as you feel inclined, it is very satisfying ending a game with a good K/D, even if one has lost. Its also very funny knowing that perfection is achieving a K/D ratio of infinity. :) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Fabius said:

I would much prefer if the K/D statistic is left alone and you just add other stats as you feel inclined, it is very satisfying ending a game with a good K/D, even if one has lost. Its also very funny knowing that perfection is achieving a K/D ratio of infinity. :) 

yes, i proposed changing the economy score to resources spent and adding a "value ratio" of military score/economy score. KD would stay the same.

Edited by real_tabasco_sauce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

i proposed changing the economy score to resources spent

So a wasteful player would get a higher score, while players being efficient at gathering would get a lower score.

Do tributes even count towards resources spent?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evolution of the economy score  

Since its introduction, it has remained largely the same, counting everything that is collected; the only notable change is that trading income is also taken into account.

function calculateEconomyScore(playerState, index)
{
	let total = 0;

	// Notice that this skips the vegetarianFood property of resourcesGathered
	for (let type of g_ResourceData.GetCodes())
		total += playerState.sequences.resourcesGathered[type][index];

	total += playerState.sequences.tradeIncome[index];
	return Math.round(total / 10);
}

Evolution of the military score

  1. rP12914 - Add "score" tab in post-game summary (2/Dec/12) by @quantumstate
  2. rP18395 - Capture statistics summary  (17/Jun/16) by @elexis
    • Related tickets:
    • Relevant code:
      • function calculateMilitaryScore(playerState)
        {
        	return Math.round((playerState.statistics.enemyUnitsKilledValue +
        		playerState.statistics.enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue +
        		playerState.statistics.buildingsCapturedValue) / 10);
        }
  3. [Last update] rP19584 - Fix economy and military score (15/May/17) by @Imarok
    • Related discussion:
    • Relevant code:
      • function calculateMilitaryScore(playerState, index)
        {
        	return Math.round((playerState.sequences.enemyUnitsKilledValue[index] +
        		playerState.sequences.unitsCapturedValue[index] +
        		playerState.sequences.enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue[index] +
        		playerState.sequences.buildingsCapturedValue[index]) / 10);
        }

Explanation

  • calculateMilitaryScore
    • sum of all is values, divided by 10
  • enemyUnitsKilledValue
    • the sum cost of the unit that gets killed
    • e.g. a Ptolemies Pikeman: 50 wood, 50 food = 100 points
      • there is no difference between killing a unit costing 50 food or 50 metal, the points you get are the same
  • unitsCapturedValue
    • Units are uncapturable, this value is always zero
  • enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue
    • similar to enemyUnitsKilledValue 
    • e.g. Ptolemies Barracks: 200 wood, 100 stone = 300 points
  • buildingsCapturedValue
    • each building has a capture value, as soon as you capture a building completely, you receive points for the costs of this building, partial captures are not taken into account
    • e.g. Ptolemies Storehouse: 40 wood = 40 points

Steps to change any score

  • Thread/ ticket with discussion
    • Propose a formulae, get the consensus of some well respected players
  • Make a patch or ping me to make a patch
18 hours ago, thephilosopher said:

I wonder if it might be possible to have a military score that incorporated kill:death ratio into the score.

Some variables that can easily be used for a new formulae can be found in the StatisticsTracker.js file. If you need a new value it would need to be created e.g. D4224 - Total idle time. It's better to keep it simple, because that increases the likelihood that change will actually happen.

		"unitsTrained": this.unitsTrained,
		"unitsLost": this.unitsLost,
		"unitsLostValue": this.unitsLostValue,
		"enemyUnitsKilled": this.enemyUnitsKilled,
		"enemyUnitsKilledValue": this.enemyUnitsKilledValue,
		"unitsCaptured": this.unitsCaptured,
		"unitsCapturedValue": this.unitsCapturedValue,
		"buildingsConstructed": this.buildingsConstructed,
		"buildingsLost": this.buildingsLost,
		"buildingsLostValue": this.buildingsLostValue,
		"enemyBuildingsDestroyed": this.enemyBuildingsDestroyed,
		"enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue": this.enemyBuildingsDestroyedValue,
		"buildingsCaptured": this.buildingsCaptured,
		"buildingsCapturedValue": this.buildingsCapturedValue,
		"resourcesCount": this.GetResourceCounts(),
		"resourcesGathered": this.resourcesGathered,
		"resourcesUsed": this.resourcesUsed,
		"resourcesSold": this.resourcesSold,
		"resourcesBought": this.resourcesBought,
		"tributesSent": this.tributesSent,
		"tributesReceived": this.tributesReceived,
		"tradeIncome": this.tradeIncome,
		"treasuresCollected": this.treasuresCollected,
		"lootCollected": this.lootCollected,
		"populationCount": this.GetPopulationCount(),
		"percentMapExplored": this.GetPercentMapExplored(),
		"teamPercentMapExplored": this.GetTeamPercentMapExplored(),
		"percentMapControlled": this.GetPercentMapControlled(),
		"teamPercentMapControlled": this.GetTeamPercentMapControlled(),
		"peakPercentMapControlled": this.peakPercentMapControlled,
		"teamPeakPercentMapControlled": this.teamPeakPercentMapControlled,
		"successfulBribes": this.successfulBribes,
		"failedBribes": this.failedBribes

 

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

My $0.02:

- Improve anti-lag (as many players coming from other RTS/Strategy games want bigger battles than 20vs20)

- Rework trading path for AI, maybe even allow for custom path drawing (if there is enemy CC between two AI allies, they will just send their traders right through enemy base)

- When AI is about to attack, it will always make a "build-up" spot, where most of army gathers (and pathfinder starts to sweat), maybe this can be improved?

- When AI garrisons tower/fortress, it is easy to move units back out of map visibility, so AI will force defenders out of the buildings, then kill then and capture tower/fortress

- Check if collecting game statistics (units killed etc) affect game performance, if it does then allow to disable collecting game stats

- Gaia ships on some maps hit very hard, it is not possible to achieve same damage per shot with any civ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

So a wasteful player would get a higher score, while players being efficient at gathering would get a lower score.

Do tributes even count towards resources spent?

XD good point. In 0ad, the waste is usually the player with many resources gathered and very little spent (on military, upgrades etc). New players often have a hard time spending their resources, so this could perhaps help with that, and explain why some players lose even with high eco scores. I would say tributes should not count as res spent, because they are spent by your ally. The idea behind the change in eco score is to set up the "value ratio" i mentioned earlier. I expect this stat to be very helpful.

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

40 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

So a wasteful player would get a higher score, while players being efficient at gathering would get a lower score.

Do tributes even count towards resources spent?

quite the opposite: if someone is efficient at gathering, he will spend everything, redundancy and efficiency are contrary. also wasteful players will have low returns from their eco investements and will have lower eco scores in the end. tributes should better count as spent though.

Edited by alre
  • Like 2
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...