Why units are produced so fast?

[Akira Kurosawa]

7 minutes ago, Frederick_1 said:

When there are enough buildings close enough together they protect each other from decay.

What you mean? All buildings with no border-generator were decayed independently from nearests. Houses were decay by whole cluster, barracks etc. Even at Cossacks: BtoW player have more time to save converted building from fire than here from decay.

Edited July 24, 2022 by DeWynter

[Stan`]

2 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I did but never figured out how to get rid of the border lines on the minimap. 

But can't you just disable territory influence from all buildings, and set it  to be build in neutral territory?

[Gurken Khan]

6 minutes ago, Frederick_1 said:

And in the begining of the game to prevent an watchtower from decay often 3 men garnison is not enough you also need the sentries upgrade to rescue them.

Which civ? I think celts have lower garrison regeneration rate? And I thought sentries only shoot more arrows.

 

5 minutes ago, DeWynter said:

What you mean? All buildings with no border-generator were decayed independently from nearests. Houses were decay by whole cluster, barracks etc.

Buildings need to be connected to a CC (own or allied). Buildings can provide a connection, but when it's lost they will decay.

[rossenburg]

1 hour ago, DeWynter said:

BTW! "National borders" and distance limitation beteween towers/CC/fortresses are also ugly. At AoE2 AI-player expand only on his area, and build only lumbermills and mines at distant lands. At 0 A.D. AI trying to grab all map (not bad) and you can't put Store to steal resources right under it's nose because of dumb "national borders" (very bad!). The most annoying thing is that AI's national borders may "convert" your towers, which were on your national border. Could devs at least add something like "Ox Cart" just like it was at Age of Mythology? I don't see any reason why I can't steal unprotected resources on enemy's lands. And you shoud do something with siege weapons. Just 5 rams can win the map because destroying CC authomatically starts decay and AI run to towers and fortress to stop it instead attack rams. National borders - most evil game-ruin thing what may happen at RTS.

since we are comparing 0ad and aoe side by side ( which shouldn't be so ),  i have a personal question : "Will you buy the idea of healers converting enemy units as your units?"

[Akira Kurosawa]

14 minutes ago, rossenburg said:

Will you buy the idea of healers converting enemy units as your units?

It's not bad idea but only if solders lost their building capture ability. And towers/cc/forts will be able to build close to each other.

 

But I've got better idea! Allow to upgrade palisades into stone walls and centry towers intro stone towers.

Edited July 24, 2022 by DeWynter

[hyperion]

28 minutes ago, Stan` said:

But can't you just disable territory influence from all buildings, and set it  to be build in neutral territory?

This breaks the AI and not rendering the borders needs few C++ changes.

[Frederick_1]

9 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

Which civ? I think celts have lower garrison regeneration rate? And I thought sentries only shoot more arrows.

I experienced that when as romans I lost an sentry tower even with 3 citizen soldiers garnisend in.  The upgrade simulates one more garnisoned in. I think with other civilisations it is the same when you loose a cc.

 

9 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

 

Buildings need to be connected to a CC (own or allied). Buildings can provide a connection, but when it's lost they will decay.

In some games I experienced that enemy buildings around a conquered CC do not alter their belonging, no matter how long I wait. Altough I can't set up a demonstration at the moment.

[LetswaveaBook]

52 minutes ago, rossenburg said:

since we are comparing 0ad and aoe side by side ( which shouldn't be so ),  i have a personal question : "Will you buy the idea of healers converting enemy units as your units?"

We could do that. Get some monks, lets wave a book towards those huskarls and sent them back to where they came from.

[Stan`]

1 hour ago, hyperion said:

This breaks the AI and not rendering the borders needs few C++ changes.

[Differential] D1581 Mod Interface: Enable setting territory visibility (wildfiregames.com)

[Gurken Khan]

1 hour ago, Frederick_1 said:

The upgrade simulates one more garnisoned in.

Interesting!

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

2 hours ago, Stan` said:

But can't you just disable territory influence from all buildings, and set it  to be build in neutral territory?

No, because the AI only knows how to build in its own territory, so you still need territories. You just set them to really large ranges and set the territory line texture to 100% transparency. Build limits are still set to allied, own, enemy, and neutral for the player's sake though. 

Edited July 24, 2022 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Feldfeld]

I had an idea which is probably too crazy but you never know:

- Civic centers start with a smaller territory and are cheaper
- Buildings don't expand territory around them
- Instead, they expand a little bit the territory of their central CC
- There is a limit for each building type of the total territory expansion they give to 1 CC
- Towers may be an exception to be the only building that expands territory around it, but it is not possible to build multiple nearby towers to reach a location linearly.
- Maybe there could be a bonus if buildings are closer to their central CC, encouraging careful city planning.
- Fortresses may be built in neutral territory and have some territory around it but this cannot be grown like with CCs
- Civic centers could also start weaker but get stronger the more buildings are around it (with exception to initial CC to provide some defense)
- A fully developped CC will still have reasonably smaller territory than current p3 CC
- There will still be a solid minimum range between CCs encouraging players to develop their secondary cities instead of building many of them to grab all nearby resources.

[LetswaveaBook]

2 hours ago, Frederick_1 said:

The upgrade simulates one more garnisoned in.

@Gurken Khan was correct that the upgrade only adds a single arrow to the volley and the upgrades does not do anything else.

However this comment is totally of topic.

[Player of 0AD]

On 23/07/2022 at 6:24 PM, BeTe said:

And when and how you do fights? Make big blob with siege units and just rush thru middle?

It depends. The classical approach is to reach the pop limit, get most blacksmith upgrades and to attack then with a huge force. Mixing in some siege might be helpful but is not totally necessary

15 hours ago, Dizaka said:

I'm curious:  If the game would use less units and be equally as challenging / fun (basically, the same, just less units) would that be ok to use less units vs more?  There's a point, I think, where it would be more fun to do 6v6 and 10v10 games that are low pop rather than a 1v1 with 300 or 4v4 with 200.

Anything lower than 200 isnt really fun

[alre]

28 minutes ago, Player of 0AD said:

Anything lower than 200 isnt really fun

why do you say that?

[Player of 0AD]

1 minute ago, alre said:

why do you say that?

Pop limits below 200 frustrate me because I cant train as many units as I want. 200 is default in 4v4, but I prefer something like 300 over it, as it leaves more room for different strategies.

[BeTe]

1 hour ago, Player of 0AD said:

It depends. The classical approach is to reach the pop limit, get most blacksmith upgrades and to attack then with a huge force. Mixing in some siege might be helpful but is not totally necessary

Anything lower than 200 isnt really fun

> Anything lower than 200 isnt really fun

We are comparing 0AD to AOE where there is much less units and I don't think AOE is boring. Off course to make 0AD fun with less units I guess we would need another changes.

> It depends. The classical approach is to reach the pop limit, get most blacksmith upgrades and to attack then with a huge force. Mixing in some siege might be helpful but is not totally necessary

This sounds just terrible and boring.  

Would it not be more interesting to be able to harm opponent with 5-10 units like in AOE, which you can micro and do some tricks to win fight? Like cavarly dance or whatever name is in 0AD...

Edited July 24, 2022 by BeTe

[alre]

1 hour ago, Player of 0AD said:

Pop limits below 200 frustrate me because I cant train as many units as I want. 200 is default in 4v4, but I prefer something like 300 over it, as it leaves more room for different strategies.

come on that's not an answer. why do you need that many units? do you play low pop games sometimes?

[Gurken Khan]

19 minutes ago, BeTe said:

Would it not be more interesting to be able to harm opponent with 5-10 units like in AOE, which you can micro and do some tricks to win fight? Like cavarly dance or whatever name is in 0AD...

You still can harm opponents with 5-10 units, especially if you go for a very early cav rush. Dancing seems to be very frowned upon, at least by a sufficiently large part of the MP crowd; so much so that it was deliberately nerfed.

[BeTe]

5 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

You still can harm opponents with 5-10 units, especially if you go for a very early cav rush. Dancing seems to be very frowned upon, at least by a sufficiently large part of the MP crowd; so much so that it was deliberately nerfed.

Yes, but I mean you can't capture / destroy anything. You can cav. rush with 5 units and attack only women, but even that works only if unscouted which is not likely to happen on intermediate level. Also it's risky - if failed you are behind in number of workers, unless there is much hunt around. I'd not consider "rush" strategy as argument to my concerns. 

[alre]

2 minutes ago, BeTe said:

I'd not consider "rush" strategy as argument to my concerns. 

that's curious. either you go for early aggression, or you go for early eco + late aggression. what else would you want to do? 

[BeTe]

15 minutes ago, alre said:

that's curious. either you go for early aggression, or you go for early eco + late aggression. what else would you want to do? 

All this topic is about smaller blobs in general. That's all. To be more like AOE 2 , WC 2 in that sense...

Edited July 24, 2022 by BeTe

[chrstgtr]

21 minutes ago, alre said:

come on that's not an answer. why do you need that many units? do you play low pop games sometimes?

The game is substantively different at different pop points. Defenses work better in low pop games. So low pop games allow for more raiding with stronger troops. So something like 10 champ cav can easily counterattack, wipe out an opposing players entire eco, and win a game because players can’t attack, defend, and eco all at once. That is undesirable for me. 

The raiding is all still possible at higher pop games, but it isn’t outcome determinative 

[Gurken Khan]

56 minutes ago, BeTe said:

All this topic is about smaller blobs in general. That's all. To be more like AOE 2 , WC 2 in that sense...

Smaller blobs for the sake of smaller blobs. And to be more like other games. Nothing against new members with fresh ideas, but I don't know if this game will turn into what you want.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

@BeTe https://0ad.mod.io/delenda-est/ This mod might satiate you.