All Activity

Attacks by swarms of fpv drones Screen Recording 2026-10-20 232949.mp4 Screen Recording 2026-10-20 233146.mp4

Hi everyone, I’d like to share a small tool I made for anyone who wants to build their own AI for 0 A.D. GitHub: https://github.com/lilypoppybooks/PetraBot_Template The problem Starting a new bot from Petra usually begins with a tedious step: copy Petra, then rename it everywhere. Since R28 introduced JavaScript modules, you also have to fix about a hundred import paths. Miss a single one and your bot silently loads the original Petra code, or two derived bots overwrite each other in the game’s file system. The solution PetraBot_Template is an exact copy of Petra from Release 28, isolated in its own namespace, with no change in behavior. It comes with a small Python script that clones it under a new name: python3 clone_bot.py Alpha # creates PetraBot_Alpha.zip The script renames everything (mod, AI folder, imports) and keeps the license and credits intact. You get an independent, working bot ready to install, and several clones can play against each other in the same game. I've tested it over roughly 10 hours of games: I tested both land and naval maps across different game settings, repeatedly comparing the Petra bot, the PetraBot_Template, and the derived Petra. The result is that PetraBot_Template works and behaves exactly like Petra. Why? To make developing Petra-based bots easier. Instead of spending time on renaming, developers can focus on what matters: new ideas and new strategies. And since every bot starts from the same reliable base, it becomes simple to compare them fairly and to share results. Three gaps I see in Petra Petra is stable, but in my opinion three areas leave room for improvement: Naval strategy. Petra’s naval manager mostly handles trade, fishing, coastal defense and transport. The comment at the top of navalManager.js even lists sea scouting as an “ultimately” goal. On island maps, war fleets that take the initiative, sea control and coordinated landings would make a big difference. Politics, dialogue and intimidation. Petra already handles tributes and alliance requests, but its diplomacy is reactive and its messages don’t form a real dialogue. Imagine a bot with a diplomatic personality, one that can intimidate (demand a tribute and actually attack if refused), remember betrayals, or make calculated alliances. Exploration and strategy. Petra mostly picks its strategy from its own situation and reacts more than it anticipates. Early scouting, adapting to what was seen, choosing targets from gathered information and switching plans mid-game are all open fields. Each of these could be a project on its own, and the template makes it easy to start one. Links GitHub: https://github.com/lilypoppybooks/PetraBot_Template License: GPL-2.0-or-later, same as Petra. All credit for Petra goes to Wildfire Games and the Petra contributors. This project is not an official Wildfire Games project. If you build a bot from it, please share it here! I’d love to see clones play against each other and compare approaches. Feedback and suggestions are very welcome. petrabot_cycle.svg

Of course, but in all the Age of games, the way civilisations are designed is similar. What I mean is that we should draw a bit more inspiration from this approach to designing civilisations rather than making them too similar to one another. I'd love to try it !

Code was removed in https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/commit/61534d63a1a5988b837425b2ac48b1e956c07e7d.

Join the server to find out all the info is on the discord.

What is roleplaying all about?

Ok, but I like fog if the scenario calls for it... just not so fast when zooming out on an apparently clear weather.

Yeah thats map fog, you can fix it by turning off fog in your graphics settings.

Hello, i have made a discord community for anybody interested in learning and playing Diplomacy & Roleplaying in 0ad, I have also made a Mediterranean style map just for this you are all welcome to join and check it out. https://discord.gg/2ZT99gzd3

All German units seem to have only white shields. Plutarch mentions them when describing the Cimbrian cavalry (but does not mean Germans only used that color). I think Cimbrian champion cavalry could still have only white shields. Other units could have more varied colors (or just player color)

@Perzival12, @Stan`, this always happens to me (maybe some setting?): Recording 2026-10-19 205013.mp4

Map with fog maybe ?

I don’t think anything gets whiteish, however there is a shadow cutoff distance (which can be disabled in your graphics settings)

@Obelix I just didn't want to constantly shove that link on people's faces, but issues that have already been addressed in Thoughts on the Spartans/Athenians come up way too often

I mean when you really zoom out. Currently things get whitish, I would have guessed for some performance measure, since it's an effect I don't like.

Welcome to the community, @HELIOZAH! If you really wanna dive into it : In abovementioned Topic @scr0llbaer replied correctly (see below), that phasing shouldn't be prio 1 as researching Technologies for the Market and the Forge might be more important than reaching Phase 3/Town Phase. I would enhance that statement with the Store house and Farm house Technologies.

However, I’ve found that they don’t perform well when playing against humans, and they were written for an older version of 0 A.D. (though this can be easily fixed in the `mod.json` file). That said, I might plan to upgrade Petra or create a new bot; if the bot in my mod proves successful, the features that are already working will be incorporated and improved upon.

It would be great if you would be so nice to tell us the URL, please. The forums software can render it beautiful and nobody has to search for his/her/their own.

With a map 2.5 times the diameter of the Giant map, I don’t see any issue with having a total of around 1,000 units.

"... and be visible" I guess you mean, and yes, I just tried and can't reproduce what I thought I saw long ago (since then I've never used horizontal view again). Maybe something got fixed, or I misinterpreted what was happening back then.

It’s impossible for something to be under the fog of war, can you post a screenshot of what you mean (I’m very curious of how this is possible).

I've noticed in the past that the horizontal view reveals things that shouldn't be revealed (under fog of war), have you checked this? And how would all this respond with a lot of units on the map? (Which I guess has been one of the reasons for certain limitations all along).

Many relevant points are raised there: "If your ships cannot reach your opponent, they become obsolete quickly, unless they give you access to resources": which is why a salvage system would work nicely. Unwanted ships were used from building early temples to laying the ground for port extensions, and when Rome controlled the whole Mediterranean the huge Hellenistic ships disappeared (along with the knowledge of how to build them). "The game designer has to answer a painful question: how important should water actually be?": if the game pretends to have any semblance of historicity for its time period, the answer is obvious (for plenty of civs at least). He also describes at the beginning proper naval combat as having a good variety of ships, already proposed, and currently lacking and inaccurate. "Large warships should feel heavy, they take time to turn, and they also occupy a lot of space, and that’s what makes them insanely cool": which is why I find the puzzling proposals to shrink their size a big step towards blandness and mediocrity. "Amphibious landing should create an exciting D-day moment but, you know, players just have to lead every unit manually, then protect that transport and find a safe coast, and then unload manually once again": a real struggle, which is why, among other uses, I proposed Target Area: "Water must connect different parts of the strategy, ships should support land attacks, and of course, you should have some real incentive to actually play for that water control. A player who loses the sea should suffer but should always have ways to respond": indeed, water should offer rewards without being snowbally. While the Greeks and others were not that big in fishing, maritime trade should be way more efficient than it is now (as should be maritime looting). I already criticised the Trader and Merchantmen capacity being the same. If one loses all control of the water (a situation usually hard to reverse), but has plenty of resources, maybe an expensive Mercenary Pirate force could be hired (from the Market or something, no Dock needed), to be able to reclaim part of the sea (this would work nicely with my proposal of Mercenaries having temporary contracts instead of being permanently trained like other units). "Water, of course, needs some real terrain. Things like shallow water reefs, islands, maybe some weather-like storm, visual blockers and several narrow routes that can create positioning decisions": 0 A.D. does have some implicit water depths, but the variety of "terrains" should be increased. Reefs are a good idea (I wonder if they could deal some damage to ships, and slow them down), and hopefully some weather is coming.

Yes, "AI" has been a term since the 1950s at least. The grand vision of an "AGI", an Artificial General Intelligence, basically the SciFi scenario of an all-knowing all-capable entity, already existed back then. Many developments in computing that were thought to help achieve this vision hence ran under an "AI" label historically, not only neural networks, the stuff that LLMs and picture generators of today are based on today and that eat so many resources. Chatbots like ELIZA were not based on neural networks. Just classical IF-THEN-ELSE and some clever play on human psychology. But yes, the neural network approach was also known since at least the 1950s, but it was all theory, it was known the required computing power would be infeasible for a very long time. Today's web and Google didn't exist back then, so it was assumed a more traditional knowledge base expert system would also be a necessary component of an AGI, hence many developments apart from resource-eating neural networks also ran under the "AI" label, but I'm almost certain the term AI in video games didn't even stem from that, i.e. from research lab level algorithmic sophistication, it was rather, as said, just a colloquial way to say "non human opponent".