All Activity

You mean the overlap of fields you see in game? They actually are not overlapping. The "core" part of a field is smaller, and I'm computing based on that core part only. In game, they render a bit more field outside of that core part. That part cannot be farmed, and is for aesthetic effect only.

You are not considering Field overlapping?

Six months has passed. Development of stevenlauBot did not stop, but I have been dealing with a really difficult problem - optimal field placement around CC. The algorithm improved over and over, and now reaches an optimal solution worth sharing. Before I go into technical details, here are some screenshots of optimal placements in random Mainland. Pink represents the region where we can place field freely, and blues are the fields. Now I am writing some technical details. I first define Gap and Hang. Gap Ideally we want to let a field to touch (snap) the CC (or actually any dropsite), so that farmers can efficiently drop resources without walking. However, since farmers have a size and dropping range, we can actually leave a gap (around 5.6m) between field and CC and the farmer can still drop resources without walking. Leaving such a gap might allow more fields to be placed. Hang In games, we often see players put field snapping at the corner of CC. This is not ideal, because farmers will have a walk a bit to drop resources. We name this case "hanging" entirely outside of CC. If we now shift that field a little inward toward the CC, it is still hanging, but only part of it is hanging. Then farmers can farm in the part where the field is not hanging, and they can drop resources without walking. That non-hanging part is around 8m. Now to state our problem more precisely, we want to place maximum number of fields around CC, allowing gap between CC, but keep certain non-hanging part. We disallow rotation. Although rotation might give better arrangement, the problem will become too difficult. In fact, disallowing rotation is the sole assumption of our algorithm. Under such assumption, our algorithm gives optimal placement. I also claim that if we allow rotation, no efficient algorithm exists. People who are familiar with algorithm, especially computational geometry, should realise this is a very difficult problem. This is shape arrangement in continuous 2D space, and deterministic algorithm might not even exist. Scientists usually do heuristics to find good-enough (but not optimal) solution in these problems. I had also been working on heuristics, but as I keep improving my heuristics, I found that our problem is quite special and is much simplified. It turned out that we can work out a combinatorial algorithm to really find the optimal placement. We basically do trapezoidal decomposition of the region, that we do sweep line algorithm over all such trapeziums, exhaust all combinations, and merge linearly related constraints. The algorithm is super complicated, but I think I made it. Do you like it?

EDIT: In the Settings I found a Hotkey to activate a build-in FPS counter, which works just fine, so I guess this can be considered solved.

Some YouTube channels are making good use of artificial intelligence to create illustrations with a certain degree of accuracy.

What do you mean you weren't even trying? In my headcanon it was literally because of being at the top.

Ngl this is so true. picked sparta for the exact same reasons but their vanilla balance is kinda a clear disappointment when you actually try to fight end-game macedonians 1v1. the community mod definitely fixes that vibe though making micro-managing a small elite squad actually viable against huge eco groups. honestly this whole high-risk high-reward elite infantry playstyle always reminds me of min-maxing a warrior in wow.

Ah thanks for clarifying that @real_tabasco_sauce because i was literally clicking around the fort waiting for units to spawn lmao. honestly paying that much metal/wood just for extra default arrows feels kinda bad in a27. unless you are hard turtling those mats are way better spent on your actual army or rushing town centers

Classic-Burger is absolutely right, the core capture system needs a major overhaul before we even think about adding complex mechanics like faction unit recruitment. Right now, without a proper cooldown or assimilation process, introducing cross-faction recruitment would just lead to insane snowballing or broken 'cheese' strategies in high-level matches. I love the tactical depth it could bring to protecting key tech structures, but the balance nightmare of mixing faction bonuses and counters might be too much for the current meta to handle.

In theory, tunnels are a point A and a point B.They don't always appear as such, but they are more common in sci-fi or magic RTS games.

Good point. 5-6 teams may be useful, if using different ai levels though

create feature then people adapt...

So, isn't the advantage of cavalry their high health? They cost extra due to their superior speed, but they also have a massive amount of extra health.

Is it? I can remember proper tunnels one could make only in Earth 2150, and an underground level in Heroes of Might and Magic… but then barely anything else, the Zerg tunnels in StarCraft, which I don’t think 0 A.D. should aim for (to avoid a teleporting effect).

I guess you didn't understand what I said in the first place, which was: no unit should be so OP as to have some gentlemen's agreement not to produce it, and when there's a misunderstanding regarding that, to have people whining about it, as it happened recently. So, if you say "champ cav is nonsensically fast", "naked fana has capture speed of a champ despite not having any of the drawbacks of a regular champ", and what you now added, I'd assume you agree with those complaining that they are OP, so I was agreeing that they should be nerfed, at least to the point of no ban needed to even be considered.

What's the point of more teams? When there are more then 4 teams at least one player is a lone in a team. So it has the same effect as to assign no team to that player.

This is a good way of reasoning. Is neutrality a kind of cosmic chaos in nature? There should be capture conditions for those buildings. That religious buildings contribute "morality" or "loyalty" The Houses too, the family that lives in the houses, and the gods are also part of the land.

there's not one right now @diagonalo as I've been very busy. I'd like to make a release, but I can't guarantee when.

Note to future Mac users: enable it as the first mod. It crashed my game

I'm not sure where else to find this info but will there be a community mod where one could preview any of these changes for R28 ?

yep, the fact that map size and playable area so strongly affects cavalry balance is good evidence that their speed is too great a share of their balancing. I think it would be good to bring them closer to infantry units and differentiate their roles (as opposed to just being faster, better infantry for the most part). This is made much more difficult by the fact that CS infantry are economic assets while CS cavalry are not, but improvements are still possible.

You forgot to add a well or some central element. I'm looking for references and ideas and doing research. There's always a central object, like a well. Houses of different sizes. Sheds and warehouses. Pens for goats, sheep and chickens. Orchards and small cultivated fields. Wooden fences and low stone walls. Simple workshops (carpenter, blacksmith, potter). Bonfires, benches, carts and piles of firewood. A composition needs to be made.

Hey, @Itms I just submitted my mod to mod.io and was wondering if you could approve it. The mod adds a unique Māori civ to the game. Thanks, Zach

Definitely the fana should not be exclusively a counter-champ cav unit nor be stripped of its cav damage multiplier. Reduction of unit stats will suffice. HP and or a little speed and maybe one more armor value. Speed nerf for cav would be great. People are trying to play 7v7s right now and its definitely even more clear that the speed of cav could be nerfed substantially and the mobility advantage would still be enough.