Age of Strategy Forums

This "vote" is not a vote

• it is a priority list that will never get closed

• Select here the most importants in your opinion

• You can change your votes any time

• will be more items, suggest please

voteable!

Definitely want the floor/layers.

Change.

i like conversion based on will, with 100 will points that r damaged by convert, basic 20 dmg, with persuasion 50 and for priest max 70, subtracted by the current spell resist formula

godOfKings wrote: ↑Mon Sep 17, 2018 3:59 pm i like conversion based on will, with 100 will points that r damaged by convert, basic 20 dmg, with persuasion 50 and for priest max 70, subtracted by the current spell resist formula

Instead of spells res (than only for Aos)

A bit major game changer suggestion....

Counter attack of units with bonus will NOT deal full damage, instead it deals half of bonus damage (which is still higher than half of basic damage)

This suggestion is mainly to deal with cavalry that deals full damage on counter attack to high hp anti-mounted infantry

Its a major balancing problem in aos for voulgier (and also may b some units in aof)

what about not having bonus against anti cavalry this case? (that seems more reasonable to me)

damage of cavalry becomes too low against high hp anti cavalry infantry, it is decided (in AOS) no matter how high hp an infantry has, for a cavalry it should take 2-3 hits (mostly 2 hits unless its very expensive infantry like 7 turn spartan or 5 turn templar) to kill the infantry

soory i dont understand.

you mentioned that pikeman like units should not be killed by knigths that easy on counter (because of their bonus against pikemna)
to this i uggested not to give bonus against pikeman -> so they will not be killed thaat easy on normal attack, and neither on counterattack.

He means that anti-cav infantry in aos must be easily killable by cavalry still.
If you'll remove that bonus than cavalry won't be able to kill easily anti-cav infantry (especially such as voulgier).

But at the same time anti-cav infantry must take a bit less damage from enemy cav at least on counters.

mainly that it should b possible for knights to easily kill anti-cav infantry wen they atk first, at the same time, killing anti-cavalry infantry (or just any unit) by counter attack alone is not really strategic (because its not the player who owns the defending unit giving the command to kill the attacking unit), if we still want full counter damage then we can use the specAction for full counter damage on that specific unit that actually needs it

This also actually will partially solve the problem of humans for dealing with giants — only 50% damage on counter from giants gained by drake knight is not so high. I must remind that for now they do full damage on counter to drake knight because they have 1% bonus against flying and drake knight is flying.

maybe i am lost here but here is my idea maybe good for all problems:

what about modifying counter attack:
- if i was attacked
- and i have bonus against attacker
- then
if
a) attacker has no bonus against me than i do normal bonused counter attack
b) attacker HAS bonus against me than i do normal counter attack (like i had no bonus at all) - as i remember that is power/2 currently.

(so practically bonus on both sides neglects each other on counter)

+1

Yes, please.

it is in uos already.

OK cool, now voulgier will b a feasible unit to make

@Stratego (dev) After reading through the many negative reviews in Google play, I have come to the conclusion that this should b the top most priority right now:

A new AI-beginner difficulty where ai has access to only default units and no upgrade units, this difficulty is chosen by players during skirmish map set up or map maker for campaigns (like first few maps of a big campaign) although it cannot help the older maps that many are almost impossible without buying gem units, at least the possibility will b opened to make future better maps, and beginner players can choose to butt heads against ai with default units to slowly get used to gameplay instead of suddenly being overwhelmed by all kinds of new units he never saw before

Here i agree ompletely. This will make some maps also more enjoyable without making them too easy.

i already checked how could i do it - not easy.
But the only way is to make a new AI level, like AI Ultra Easy
so will be

Ultra Easy AI
Easy AI
Hard AI


how they would pay in campaign maps:
if Map desigher set Hard and
- player choses to Easy will get -1 gems in all levels. (0-1-3)
- player choses to Ultra Easy will get -2 gems in all levels. (0-0-2)

How Ultra Easy AI would work:

I dont want to get rid of upgrade units (that is an incentive to get all upgardes) but some other way nerfing the AI difficulty.
if anyone have any other ide how please tell me.

my first, rough alternatives
a) AI will not produce units the same rate: eg 4x production times for it.
b) AI will not produce the best units aginst player units (eg. now produces piked units against cavalries, and removing this "IQ" and making it random.)
c) AI injured units already do not attack but becomes "frozen" on their tiles at approx 60% of max HP, i can increase this to 80% instead
c) AI units with minimal injuries will move them half distance they can walk rounded up (eg. a chariot will walk 2 instead of 4, a knight will move 3 instead of 5)

I don't want to nerf current ai logic, but whether ai uses upgrade units or not being chosen by players themselves by selecting new difficulty or the current easy/hard difficulty is the best solution


My suggestion is not a nerf, just like how player can choose to play default or upgrade or spell included game, they can also choose that ai uses upgrade or not

If making a new difficulty is not possible then at least wen player presses the button for no upgrade game, both players and ai should b included in restriction to default units

If we nerf ai and make it 'dumb' that will also not b any fun game to play and players will quit for being too boring instead

I don't want to nerf current ai logic

sure i ment the new "Ultra Easy" ai logic to be "nerfed" compared to current (current AI levels would not be modified)

My suggestion is not a nerf, just like how player can choose to play default or upgrade or spell included game, they can also choose that ai uses upgrade or not

actually i plan not to remove using upgrades from any AI level.

If making a new difficulty is not possible

it is possible, and only way, current AI levels are untouched.


i have updated my post to be clear: i talk about NEW AI level. not modifying current ones.

What people don't like the most is not AI being too difficult.
They don't like unfair things.
It's natural.

So creating really innovative, taking a ton of mind power and work to implement new AI levels, maybe totally pointless.
New player sees new units being produces en masse.
His natural justice system screams "unfair".
It's not only about unfairness, there is also a progress issue. Starting the game You are bombarded by a ton of new units You yourself cannot make - they are distant, alien and in many cases - completely out of place.
While progressing the game (getting gems) only player changes - AI stays the same. No matter the map there is always the same hard AI capable of everything. It becomes boring.
Easy campaigns are only easy when map creator made AI without any factories/TC or trigger changed production (there is no such case among easiest campaigns).
Challenges or historical battles could use few defined, limited AI types. Campaigns even more so.
Giving AI special disadvantages, especially when it needs code change every time seems like very inefficient way.
Especially when another solution lays around ( Collecting ideas - last post).

so?
i mean what is your conclusion to suggest?

My suggestion is making json way to add new AI types - "difficulties".
For starters by using buildlist like structure with future possible additions, which primary role would be limiting AI usage of units.

Pros:
- After initial implementation, there is less need to write new code.
- Each game can have different AI without changing the core.
- There can be themed AI types added.

If You just add new type of AI, there will be questions for more, for reworking it etc.
This way seems to work around this kind of problems.

Usually there is less inequality when the player is given absolutely no production at all, because they should have been given enough to finish the game with what every other player had.

Endru1241 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2019 10:23 pm My suggestion is making json way to add new AI types - "difficulties".
For starters by using buildlist like structure with future possible additions, which primary role would be limiting AI usage of units.

Pros:
- After initial implementation, there is less need to write new code.
- Each game can have different AI without changing the core.
- There can be themed AI types added.

If You just add new type of AI, there will be questions for more, for reworking it etc.
This way seems to work around this kind of problems.

i think the solution will not be a general solution as you ONLY restrict the unit types to train by AI. I think a difficulty of AI is not only based on what it can build, but other things like ones i have listed above, elements of AI IQ what can be applied or not depending on difficulty level.

however the json based idea is not that bad but only for the "configuration" of the fixed approx 3 level of AI. i dont see real need for many types of AI like 6-8 or more.

But as a result i understood you also like to restrict the buildable units (eg very easy AI should not build anything from upgrade section)

Most base AI levels I can imagine are:
- no upgrades at all (easy)
- the same upgrades as player (medium)
- all upgrades (hard)
- all upgrades + some bonuses (super hard)

But above that I was also thinking of thematic AI types:
-Roman
-Egyptian
-Primitive
-Barbarian
-Nordic
-Nomadic
-Crusader
-Muslim
-Religious
etc.
It would be great if thematic types could be also used in skirmish.


Lastly some configuration of detectable area of action would allow for more fitting AI:
- Only 1 turn action detect (guardian type)
- no action (neutrals, being AI/player allies)

main problem with ai having upgrades is that ai can research second and third tier units, and new players who have absolutely NO IDEA how stats and bonus works will give up simply because he uses basic swordsman while ai man_at_arms looks much cooler and stronger

another thing there are not enough anti-ship units in default army (i remember the only counter against galley i had in the beginning was converting with healer because i DID NOT unlock docks)

so, as endru mentioned, ai using upgrades doesn't incentivise players, but spits the word UNFAIR on their face if they do not buy the necessary upgrades (and they dont even know which are the necessary upgrades or where to find them now that upgrade list has become this huge)