Page MenuHomeWildfire Games

[gameplay] redo nisean_horses technology
ClosedPublic

Authored by Nescio on Jul 3 2020, 12:32 AM.

Details

Summary

The idea for this patch emerged from the discussion in D2846.
Nisean war horses were reserved for the heaviest shock cavalry (i.e. champion spearmen in 0 A.D.) This patch makes the nisean_horses.json technology similar to the spartans_agoge.json technology:

  • instead of all cavalry, limited to Champion Cavalry Spearman;
  • because +20% health is a lot, the training time is raised by 10%;
  • cost raised by 200 food to 400 food, 200 metal;
  • made the new “Horse Breeding” technology (D3317/rP24548) a requirement.

(For comparison, upgrade_mace_silvershields.json costs 600 metal.)

Test Plan

Check for mistakes, agree with the proposed values.

Event Timeline

There are a very large number of changes, so older changes are hidden. Show Older Changes
Nescio added a comment.Jul 3 2020, 1:22 PM

Seleucids have two groups of champs, one group dont have Champion spearman cavalry, so tech would be useless.

Good point! → D2858.

The changes are good for war horses
For silvershields, the tech will still remain better than the spartan agoge. (macedonian spear champion remain a little bit stronger and train faster than the spartan equivalent after the techs). This is not necessarily a problem by itself but I just want that this is recognized before accepting the patch.

Feldfeld accepted this revision.Jul 3 2020, 9:20 PM

Discard the preceding post, it was not up to date. The changes look good to me

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Jul 3 2020, 9:20 PM
borg- added a comment.Jul 4 2020, 2:28 AM

Up new patch.

borg- updated this revision to Diff 12541.Jul 4 2020, 2:32 AM
borg- edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)

@Nescio @Feldfeld check new values. I will make other patch for silver shield values.

borg- edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)Jul 4 2020, 3:29 AM
Nescio commandeered this revision.Jul 4 2020, 5:03 PM
Nescio edited reviewers, added: borg-; removed: Nescio.
Nescio updated this revision to Diff 12550.Jul 4 2020, 5:09 PM
Nescio retitled this revision from [gameplay] Balance mace_silvershields / special_war_horses techs. to [gameplay] Tweak special_war_horses technology..
Nescio edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)
Nescio edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)

Changed special_war_horses technology:

  • limited to Champion Cavalry Spearman
  • increased health bonus to 25%, but added 10% training time (cf. Agoge)
  • raised cost to
Owners added a subscriber: Restricted Owners Package.Jul 4 2020, 5:09 PM
Vulcan added a comment.Jul 4 2020, 5:14 PM

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

Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/2582/display/redirect

borg- added a comment.EditedJul 4 2020, 5:20 PM

Why remove silver shields?

600f/300m is very expensive If its affect only one unit.

I think 20% better. I agree with +10% training time.

Nescio added a comment.Jul 4 2020, 5:29 PM

Why remove silver shields?

Better include them in D2846, given the discussion there.

600f/300m is very expensive If its affect only one unit.

Given that this effectively means +80 health, I think it's worth it.
Food shouldn't be too much of a problem in late game, and the silver shields technology also affects only one unit, but costs 1000 metal.

borg- added a comment.Jul 4 2020, 5:34 PM

Why remove silver shields?

Better include them in D2846, given the discussion there.

600f/300m is very expensive If its affect only one unit.

Given that this effectively means +80 health, I think it's worth it.
Food shouldn't be too much of a problem in late game, and the silver shields technology also affects only one unit, but costs 1000 metal.

Silver Shields will be nerfed, like 600 metal (my propose) so you can based this tech on New values. I think 400/300 can be a good number.

Nescio added a comment.Jul 4 2020, 5:38 PM

I think 400/300 can be a good number.

Or 500 food + 250 metal?

borg- added a comment.EditedJul 5 2020, 2:30 PM

I think 400/300 can be a good number.

Or 500 food + 250 metal?

500 food 200 metal?

Nescio added a comment.Jul 5 2020, 9:25 PM

500 food 200 metal?

Neither D2846 nor D2858 has been committed yet, so we can postpone making a decision on the exact value.
I do like the 2:1 ratio, though, and having it proportional to the actual modifications:
20% → 400 food, 200 metal
25% → 500 food, 250 metal

borg- added a comment.Jul 5 2020, 9:35 PM

I think 400/300 can be a good number.

Or 500 food + 250 metal?

20% for me.

500 food 200 metal?

Neither D2846 nor D2858 has been committed yet, so we can postpone making a decision on the exact value.
I do like the 2:1 ratio, though, and having it proportional to the actual modifications:
20% → 400 food, 200 metal
25% → 500 food, 250 metal

By the way, which do you consider preferable, +10% training time or +10% food cost?

borg- added a comment.EditedJul 6 2020, 1:02 AM

By the way, which do you consider preferable, +10% training time or +10% food cost?

+25% health, +10% food cost. Cost 400f 200 metal.
With +10% food cost, can be +25% health.

borg- added a comment.EditedJul 15 2020, 2:50 AM

@Nescio what about values proposed by me?

@Nescio what about values proposed by me?

As I wrote earlier:

Neither D2846 nor D2858 has been committed yet, so we can postpone making a decision on the exact value.

Your proposed values look fine, though I'm not sure whether +10% food cost or +10% training time would be preferable. Other opinions are certainly welcome.

Nescio updated this revision to Diff 12716.Jul 16 2020, 1:15 PM
Nescio retitled this revision from [gameplay] Tweak special_war_horses technology. to [gameplay] redo special_war_horses technology.
Nescio edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)
  • cost changed as suggested by @borg-
  • also increase loot
Nescio added inline comments.Jul 16 2020, 1:16 PM
binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/data/technologies/successors/special_war_horses.json
27 ↗(On Diff #12716)

Or maybe +15% experience?

Nescio updated this revision to Diff 12717.Jul 16 2020, 1:17 PM
  • food, not stone

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

Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/2663/display/redirect

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

Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/2664/display/redirect

borg- added a comment.Jul 16 2020, 2:31 PM

I like new values, but dont sure about increase xp loot.

I like new values, but dont sure about increase xp loot.

More health means they're harder to kill, thus more formidable foes.
Experience gained per hit is equal to effective damage inflicted / maximum health × loot experience value.
I don't think making experience fully proportional to health is a good idea, that would bring this cavalry too close to elephants, but some minor experience increase seems reasonable (cf. Advanced and Elite unit technologies).

borg- added a comment.EditedJul 16 2020, 5:42 PM

The problem is not having an adequate calculate value. If its also provided for this technology, so all similar techs too, like agoge.

If its also provided for this technology, so all similar techs too, like agoge.

Yes! Are there any others?

borg- added a comment.Jul 17 2020, 1:23 PM

Need be changed on civ.json too.

borg- requested changes to this revision.Aug 4 2020, 5:58 PM
This revision now requires changes to proceed.Aug 4 2020, 5:58 PM
Nescio added a comment.Aug 4 2020, 7:45 PM

For the {civ}.json files, see D2720 (which is quite large).

borg- added a comment.Aug 4 2020, 7:57 PM

About increasing the loot, I still disagree.
All the technologies like blacksmith make the units more difficult to kill, so I don't see any logic to increase the loot just for this.
The rest is good and I like it.

Nescio updated this revision to Diff 13053.Aug 4 2020, 9:10 PM
  • Don't insert xp increase, per @borg-.
Vulcan added a comment.Aug 4 2020, 9:17 PM

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

Linter detected issues:
Executing section Source...
Executing section JS...
Executing section cli...

Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/2874/display/redirect

borg- accepted this revision.Aug 4 2020, 11:11 PM
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Aug 4 2020, 11:11 PM
Stan added a subscriber: Stan.Nov 14 2020, 7:24 PM

Can someone else agree with this? It's a bit weird to validate your own patch...

borg- added a comment.Dec 14 2020, 3:52 PM

We can proceed with this patch?

borg- added a comment.Dec 22 2020, 3:01 PM

We can commit this patch?

Personally not a big fan of adding increased cost. What about getting rid of that and reducing the health increase by 5 or 10 percent?

Personally not a big fan of adding increased cost. What about getting rid of that and reducing the health increase by 5 or 10 percent?

What about +10% train time while keeping +25% hp then, as @Nescio suggested?

borg- added a comment.Tue, Dec 29, 5:43 PM

I can also agree on training time instead of food cost.
But thinking better, +25% health can be a very high gain, and maybe a possible op unit, so I suggest values like:

+15% health and no penalty or
+20% health and +10 or +15% training time.

Yes, +25% health is rather effective, which is precisely why an increased food (or time) cost is reasonable. See the Spartan Agoge technology for comparison.

borg- added a comment.EditedMon, Jan 4, 2:28 AM

@Nescio can add a new icon to this technology? Currently it has the same "Horse Racing" icon, and both is researching on stable, so it can be confusing.

Nescio planned changes to this revision.Mon, Jan 11, 3:07 PM
Nescio removed a reviewer: badosu.

This needs to be rebased.

Personally not a big fan of adding increased cost. What about getting rid of that and reducing the health increase by 5 or 10 percent?

@ValihrAnt, what do you think of the values proposed by @Palaxin and those of @borg-?

In D2856#145989, @borg- wrote:

@Nescio can add a new icon to this technology? Currently it has the same "Horse Racing" icon, and both is researching on stable, so it can be confusing.

Any icon you recommend?

borg- added a comment.EditedTue, Jan 12, 3:21 AM

Any icon you recommend?

Look forum.

How about supersede "horse breeding"?

How about supersede "horse breeding"?

Good point!

Nescio updated this revision to Diff 15174.Tue, Jan 12, 2:02 PM
Nescio edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)
  • 20% health, +10% time, instead of +10% food
  • added a cavalry_health requirement
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Tue, Jan 12, 2:02 PM

Look forum.

While I have no difficulty changing, renaming, or deleting images, adding them tends to fail on my end (unlike text files), probably something to do with how arcanist and phabricator interact. So if you have a new icon, perhaps you could ask a team member (@Stan?) to commit it for you separately from this patch.

Build is green

builderr-debug-macos.txt
ld: warning: text-based stub file /System/Library/Frameworks//CoreAudio.framework/CoreAudio.tbd and library file /System/Library/Frameworks//CoreAudio.framework/CoreAudio are out of sync. Falling back to library file for linking.
ld: warning: text-based stub file /System/Library/Frameworks//AudioToolbox.framework/AudioToolbox.tbd and library file /System/Library/Frameworks//AudioToolbox.framework/AudioToolbox are out of sync. Falling back to library file for linking.
ld: warning: text-based stub file /System/Library/Frameworks//ForceFeedback.framework/ForceFeedback.tbd and library file /System/Library/Frameworks//ForceFeedback.framework/ForceFeedback are out of sync. Falling back to library file for linking.
ld: warning: text-based stub file /System/Library/Frameworks//CoreVideo.framework/CoreVideo.tbd and library file /System/Library/Frameworks//CoreVideo.framework/CoreVideo are out of sync. Falling back to library file for linking.
ld: warning: text-based stu

See https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/macos-differential/2793/display/redirect for more details.

Nescio retitled this revision from [gameplay] redo special_war_horses technology to [gameplay] redo nisean_horses technology.Tue, Jan 12, 2:14 PM
Nescio edited the summary of this revision. (Show Details)
Nescio removed a subscriber: Restricted Owners Package.
borg- accepted this revision.Tue, Jan 12, 2:14 PM

Look forum.

While I have no difficulty changing, renaming, or deleting images, adding them tends to fail on my end (unlike text files), probably something to do with how arcanist and phabricator interact. So if you have a new icon, perhaps you could ask a team member (@Stan?) to commit it for you separately from this patch.

Sure, I will ask him.

Nescio closed this revision.Wed, Jan 13, 11:18 AM
Nescio added a subscriber: Freagarach.

Committed as rP24589 by @Freagarach.