Page MenuHomeWildfire Games

[gameplay] make rams less effective vs organic units
AbandonedPublic

Authored by Nescio on Mar 27 2020, 12:40 PM.

Details

Reviewers
None
Group Reviewers
Restricted Owners Package(Owns No Changed Paths)
Summary

A frequent complaint on the forums is that rams are simply too powerful and can crush basically anything when massed. This patch reduces their attack damage by a factor 5, making them significantly less effective vs (organic) units, and gives them a 5× bonus attack vs structures, siege engines, and ships, keeping them effectively unchanged vs those.
Furthermore, it prioritizes defensive over other structures.

See also D2782 (make ram less effective) and D2508 (prevent ships and siege engines from attacking fields).

Test Plan

Agree this is an improvement.

Event Timeline

Nescio created this revision.Mar 27 2020, 12:40 PM
Owners added a subscriber: Restricted Owners Package.Mar 27 2020, 12:40 PM
Nescio added inline comments.Mar 27 2020, 12:41 PM
binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit_siege_ram.xml
13–19

All structures that could fire projectiles have the Defensive class, therefore prioritize those over other structures.

Successful build - Chance fights ever on the side of the prudent.

Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/1933/display/redirect

Angen added a subscriber: Angen.Mar 27 2020, 2:11 PM
Angen added inline comments.
binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit_siege_ram.xml
13–19

but than you would need to remove structure class

Freagarach added inline comments.
binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit_siege_ram.xml
13–19

They're processed in order of appearance.

Nescio added inline comments.Mar 27 2020, 2:21 PM
binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit_siege_ram.xml
13–19

List is ordered.

Angen added inline comments.Mar 27 2020, 2:32 PM
binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit_siege_ram.xml
13–19

ah right, they should be called OrderedPreferedClasses xD (joking)

nani added a comment.Apr 14 2020, 11:14 PM

Not sure of this change. All the other siege units also do a similar damage to regular units and the cost is the same and this change would mean a great disadvantage compared to other siege units. Also in this case the bonus should also apply against other siege units.

A frequent complaint on the forums is that rams are simply too powerful and can crush basically anything when massed. This patch reduces their attack damage by a factor 5, making them significantly less effective vs units, and gives them a 5× bonus attack vs structures, keeping them effectively unchanged vs those.

The reason for those complaints is that it is unclear what units counter rams and even then some civs don't get those units at all, like the Macedonians for whom it is the main reason they are nearly unplayed. But still I think it's best that siege rams aren't efficient at killing units too.

Not sure of this change. All the other siege units also do a similar damage to regular units and the cost is the same and this change would mean a great disadvantage compared to other siege units.

I don't believe it will hurt siege rams. They aren't intended to fight against units and I don't think they should be used like that. I don't even remember the last time someone fought my units with his rams, I just remember that it was annoying and felt super cheesy. Rams will still be the best siege unit for a fast push.

Also in this case the bonus should also apply against other siege units.

Agree with that.

! In D2684#113668, @ValihrAnt wrote:
The reason for those complaints is that it is unclear what units counter rams and even then some civs don't get those units at all, like the Macedonians for whom it is the main reason they are nearly unplayed.

Thanks for pointing this out. You emphasized the actual issue.

It's something we discussed at Fork AD

The reason which led to that is mainly that often game words are taken out of their context.
"Hack" was just the damage given by "Melee" units, without even taken care of the physical properties of the weapon in the arm. It was explained in the first final (sic) design docs. It makes things easy to balance. Melee units are differentiated by other types of damage.

It was changed here https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/15713#file143, so it's recent in that game history.

I permit myself also to quote @wowgetoffyourcellphone which at least at that time thought something similar.
https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/24734-damage-and-armour-types/&tab=comments#comment-360402

The other option is described here https://github.com/0abc/0abc-a23#overview but in that logic you need a lot of damage types.

Nescio updated this revision to Diff 12130.Jun 4 2020, 9:22 PM
Nescio retitled this revision from [gameplay] make rams less effective vs units to [gameplay] make rams less effective vs organic units.
Nescio edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)
Vulcan added a comment.Jun 4 2020, 9:28 PM

Successful build - Chance fights ever on the side of the prudent.

Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/2312/display/redirect

Freagarach added inline comments.Jun 5 2020, 7:10 AM
binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit_siege_ram.xml
6–8

You forgot this ;)

Nescio added inline comments.Jun 5 2020, 10:18 AM
binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit_siege_ram.xml
6–8

Oops, that's quite a mistake, thanks for pointing it out! I should check more carefully next time I redo a patch.

Nescio updated this revision to Diff 12140.Jun 5 2020, 10:20 AM

Successful build - Chance fights ever on the side of the prudent.

Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/2318/display/redirect

Not trying to take too lightly, but stuff like that happens. That's where a review is for :)

Stan added a subscriber: Stan.Jun 5 2020, 12:47 PM
Stan added inline comments.
binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit_siege_ram.xml
13–19

Refs D1707

Nescio abandoned this revision.Jun 8 2020, 8:29 PM

Today an alternative was committed (D2782/rP23753), therefore I'm closing this one.