Alpha 26 Pre-release/Release Candidate Build Testing

[Carltonus]

22 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

@Carltonus

https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4780

The same should be done for the testudo and anti-cavalry for the republican Roman hastati and triarii, as presented in a previous post of mine.

[Darkcity]

Why does ptolemies store house and farmstand has alarm feature? Isn't it supposed to be functionality of Civic centers? Is this intended, @Stan`?

[chrstgtr]

2 hours ago, Darkcity said:

Why does ptolemies store house and farmstand has alarm feature? Isn't it supposed to be functionality of Civic centers? Is this intended, @Stan`?

It's for all civs (unless something was changed). It's helpful to ring it because it is more local to where the raid is so the women under attack will actually garrison and the farmers won't 

Edited September 1, 2022 by chrstgtr

[Darkcity]

Why not add this in unit training buildings as well? Example - Baracks?. It's not like you only garrsion women on eco, most of the time you have to garrion other units as well. So, barack bell should work for units, so they can garrison in nearby garriosonable building or get in formation or something. Anyways that will be a new feature and discussion all together. 

[Gurken Khan]

Is it possible that this 0%?

Or is something wrong with the theatron?

I'm attaching the save where I cheated to be in the same position regarding my ally's territory.

savegame-1178.0adsave

[Stan`]

That's a known bug iirc. Due to the way territories are computed they can cancel weaker ones. The holes near the cc looks characteristic

[chrstgtr]

17 hours ago, Darkcity said:

Why not add this in unit training buildings as well? Example - Baracks?. It's not like you only garrsion women on eco, most of the time you have to garrion other units as well. So, barack bell should work for units, so they can garrison in nearby garriosonable building or get in formation or something. Anyways that will be a new feature and discussion all together. 

Maybe. But remember, women can't garrison everywhere so that would really just be to garrison all men. Garrisoning all men right now, is a pretty rare occurrence (and it is even rarer for the player who does it to survive, so this may be a feature without any real use). I would also worry about the scenario where players begin to purposely build barracks close to each other on the border, wait to be attacked and then garrison all barracks. The attacker's units would then default to capturing barracks. The garrisoned player could then engage in a series of rapid un-garrisoning and re-garrisoning that can't be stopped because the attacking player's units always default to the buildings. 

Basically, I would be concerned that such a feature has little value and could lead to annoying meta changes so I don't know if it is worth creating. But I could be wrong. 

[Nobbi]

Yesterday in an online game I just found out I could make Han ministers when capturing the building making them when I was Macedonians. It was r27067. I am not sure if this was reported before.

[Stan`]

Fixed, thanks.

[Emperior]

On 17/06/2022 at 8:38 PM, LetswaveaBook said:

In a similar test:

In A25, the javelin cavalry receives after the first hit 12 more hits while being chased over a set distance.

In A26, the javelin cavalry receives after the first hit 7 more hits while being chased over a set distance.

 

I seems that it is a fair estimate to say that melee cavalry can't chase down javelin cavalry as good as they could in A25 and during the escaping phase, the javelin cavalry receives about 1/3rd less hits in A26.

How the heck you planning to catch then javelin cav? Did they add flying eles? Inf units cannot catch cav, makes the javelin cavs already op in a25 vs units , spear or anything. Now you are quite happy for them not getting as many hits as before?

Quote

d.a.mn, cavs banned again in a26 or simply only cav games !  Mark my words!

 

Edited September 4, 2022 by Emperior

[Philip the Swaggerless]

The Han Liu Bang  2nd Aura says "Cavalry +20% attack damage", however this only applies to melee cavalry, not ranged cavalry.

{
    "type": "range",
    "radius": 40,
    "affects": ["Cavalry"],
    "modifications": [
        { "value": "Attack/Melee/Damage/Hack", "multiply": 1.2 },
        { "value": "Attack/Melee/Damage/Pierce", "multiply": 1.2 },
        { "value": "Attack/Melee/Damage/Crush", "multiply": 1.2 }
    ],
    "auraName": "Confucian Reforms",
    "auraDescription": "Cavalry +20% attack damage.",
    "overlayIcon": "art/textures/ui/session/auras/attack_bonus.png"
}
 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

14 minutes ago, Philip the Swaggerless said:

"affects": ["Cavalry"],

does this not apply to all cavalry? 

[Philip the Swaggerless]

Yes, but since it specifies "melee" it only affects melee attacks.

        { "value": "Attack/Melee/Damage/Hack", "multiply": 1.2 },
        { "value": "Attack/Melee/Damage/Pierce", "multiply": 1.2 },
        { "value": "Attack/Melee/Damage/Crush", "multiply": 1.2 }

Cyrus of Persia, for example, also has Attack/Ranged/Damage/..

 

Edited September 5, 2022 by Philip the Swaggerless
added where it says melee

[real_tabasco_sauce]

Ah I see that now, good catch!

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

@chrstgtr @Darkcity If I remember correctly there was at one point a second tier of alarm bell at the cc, back when it affected all your units, that would garrison men as much as they could. Of course this was pretty bad because you could not choose which building to go in.

A feature where clicking alarm on a barracks would take the nearest ten men and fully garrison it would definitely go in the "too automated" category for me. But perhaps if people find that garrisoning and de-garrisoning while defending from p1 or p2 cav raiding is too tedious, then I would be more open-minded.

[Stan`]

14 minutes ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

If I remember correctly there was at one point a second tier of alarm bell at the cc, back when it affected all your units, that would garrison men as much as they could. Of course this was pretty bad because you could not choose which building to go in.

Yeah it was when Alarm had levels.

[Darkcity]

11 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

If I remember correctly there was at one point a second tier of alarm bell at the cc, back when it affected all your units, that would garrison men as much as they could. Of course this was pretty bad because you could not choose which building to go in.

A feature where clicking alarm on a barracks would take the nearest ten men and fully garrison it would definitely go in the "too automated" category for me. But perhaps if people find that garrisoning and de-garrisoning while defending from p1 or p2 cav raiding is too tedious, then I would be more open-minded.

I woudn't say too automated. the feature is as simple as this: While alarmed from baracks the units will garrsion in unit training builings (like baracks and CC), and alarm is closed, the units will return to their normal work. 

Now, from pros point of view - It's a waste, no one will use it or it has no use. They can manually garriosn and will do barack teleport and stuff (which will be the opinion of most of balancing advisors here). 

From a normal player point of view handling units is too much. They either enter into the formation and let the unit die, or they click on unit to garrion but well 1 barack can garrion 10 units so other dies. In all the cases they loose the fight and units and well game is over for them and they either resign and leave the game.

Why this hypothesis? How many pro players use current alarm feature? Only in case they absolute need to do it; else they do their pretty tricks of moving units here and there or teleport using bulildings - so probably 5%.

How many newbies/normal 0ad player uses it? Most of the time - like >50% cases.

Now to answer @chrstgtr. Can this feature be abused? I doubt it. It garrioning only. Ungarrioning up to you to handle. People who know how to use teleport trick of gariron/ungarrion doesn't need this feature and still can do it. Normal player will just unrung the bell and keep playing. 

[chrstgtr]

1 hour ago, Darkcity said:

Now to answer @chrstgtr. Can this feature be abused? I doubt it. It garrioning only. Ungarrioning up to you to handle. People who know how to use teleport trick of gariron/ungarrion doesn't need this feature and still can do it. Normal player will just unrung the bell and keep playing. 

Yes, but this would allow you to potentially garrison many more units with a single click. This definetly is more automated. Whether that is bad and whether that can be abused is a different question that I am uncertain of

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

mm, I think I misunderstood @Darkcity's feature idea to be much more useful and precise than it seems he meant it to be.

(I had visualized the following scenario: 50 units on woodline, barracks nearby, 1 click on bell for barracks, 10 nearest men are automatically selected to garrison into that barracks, letting all other units continue working.)

This feature would be used by pro players in certain cases, but I don't think its quite so abusable. The main thing is that it would make it too easy to limit idle time while being harassed by cavalry.

As for a bell mechanic more similar to the women-only one that we already have, I don't think it will be used.

[andy5995]

0ad-0.0.26-rc3-27067-alpha AppImage available

[hyperion]

44 minutes ago, andy5995 said:

0ad-0.0.26-rc3-27067-alpha AppImage available

Ha, creative use of github

Quick notes looking at the yml:

• 0ad tarballs don't get checked for checksum mismatch
• No checksum generated for the app image
• ActorEditor doesn't look accessible
• 0ad.appdata.xml belongs into /usr/share/metainfo/ instead

[Karmo]

I tried that AppImage and I get much less fps (50 vs 125) there on every map compared to installed alpha 25 using identical graphics settings.

[andy5995]

4 hours ago, hyperion said:

Ha, creative use of github

Quick notes looking at the yml:

• 0ad tarballs don't get checked for checksum mismatch
• No checksum generated for the app image
• ActorEditor doesn't look accessible
• 0ad.appdata.xml belongs into /usr/share/metainfo/ instead

ActorEditor works when I use use the -editor argument or select scenario editor from the main menu. As for the rest, I should be able to fix that soon. I don't think the xml is really used by the appimage but I'll correct that. Thanks.

1 hour ago, Karmo said:

I tried that AppImage and I get much less fps (50 vs 125) there on every map compared to installed alpha 25 using identical graphics settings.

Thanks for the feedback. Can you extract the appimage and see what your fps is? You can use './Name_of_app_image --appimage-extract' and then cd to 'squashfs-root' and enter './AppRun' to execute pyrogenesis.

[Lion.Kanzen]

On 31/08/2022 at 5:10 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

The aura is generated by the hero, not the formation though. You don't want to have every unit in the formation generating auras, you want the formation itself to generate 1 aura that applies to units within it. 

The ideal for formations using that principle would be to have centurion rank as a requirement for the battalion. 

In 0ad our ranges are not. Are simply XP upgrades.

Edited September 8, 2022 by Lion.Kanzen

[Philip the Swaggerless]

Is it intentional that the storehouse can be placed directly on top of the wood on the eurasian steppe biome?