All Activity

There were a nuber of discussion is the subject e.g. the one below, but it seems to be quite complex to implement. My sugestion is to create bridges as a structure like a wall (with very low height) and the properties of a field (you walk on it and can cross it). Bridges need these properties: they need to be buidable - animations will be needed (builders cannot step left and right to the bridge unlike building a wall). Question: where should we allow building bridges: on map-defined points only (as in settlers IV) or everywhere? (I'd rather opt for predefined points as a start - simply to avoid that one clutters the entire naval map with criss-cross bridges that block ships. they need to block pathfinding for ships while they exist, and not anymore if completely destroyed they need to enable pathfinding for land objects while they exist - and not anymore if they are damaged to more than a percentage to be defined (or completely destroyed?) they need to be destroyable (ships only or also land-based siege engines? If ships only, which ones?) they need to be repairable by land forces - animations will be needed I anyone could come up with a test implementation as a mod on one test map, this would be phantastic! Unfortunatly, I am more or less illiterate in programming...

I do like it, but how would the animation look like? Your ship would be placing itself alongside the enemy ship that does not / cannot flee (anymore) - why? wow? Woudl there be some time indicator, like when capturing a building? Does the ship being attacked fight back? If so how? Arrows? I am afraid we might need to make some action visible. All this would be more convincing if we had the soldiers (proportional to the actual number of pax) visible on board which is even more complex to achieve. Or should we define three boarding levels (10%, 50% 100%) and three animations with 3, 5, or 10 soldiers visibly acting? Then we could gave the a similar aniumation as when conquering a building. I am afraid there is no really simple solution. So basically we need to discuss in greater detail what it would take to implement even partially. My preferred solution would be to start with a single feature (like indicating payload level - how many soldiers are on board). This might alreadya be useful, independent of implementing more of the following. Then we would need a manoever (or player action) that immobilizes the enemy ship, and then a takeover indicator including counter attack (!) an then finally change of ownership/command or deflection of the attack. What could that be? Sinking your ship? Self-sinking the enemy ship (like the pirates in Asterix comics ), the enemy conquering your ship?

You break a good chunk of the hotkeys doing so btw. Very likely you'll also have errors. A safe alternative is to remove : function autociv_showBuildingPlacementTerrainSnap(mousePosX, mousePosY) autociv_patchApplyN("updateBuildingPlacementPreview", function(target, that, args)

building phases already are a technology. So what you can do is add a technology field to the requirements list: "requirements": { "all": [ { "tech": "my_technology" }, {"entity": { "class": "Town", "number": 3 }} ] },

Maybe, but did the britons (or iberians?) have leopards fur? ( I adore these pictures, just could not resist splitting hairs a bit...sorry!)

I love your emblems/shields - but this one has some sort of ivy plants growing on it? Looks very nice, but there is one thing puzzling me: This is typically indicating the civ is long gone and the jungle ist starting reclaiming its grounds. At the time we are putting the game Maya were still thriving I thought?

There's a bug: one can't rotate buildings by holding the mouse button pressed and move the pointer on a obstruction. That's necessary to turn a storehouse between trees just right. The bug is in input~!autociv.js. I don't need any input changes, so I removed the file.

Is it possible to have phasing up depending on a tech as well as buidllings etc? For example I want rome p4 to only be researchable after augustus reforms. I tried a simple fix and had p4 supersede reforms, but that through a bunch of errors anyone know about how this could work? Thanks! @wowgetoffyourcellphone @Atrik @real_tabasco_sauce

I think they should be deleted, so I suggest to change it.

@Caterina Some folders are not deleted even when uninstalling the game, so I recommend you to delete them manually, just in case: Uninstall the game Delete the 0ad folder inside this three paths: C:\Users\YourUsername\AppData\Roaming\ C:\Users\YourUsername\AppData\Local\ C:\Users\YourUsername\Documents\My Games\ It might not help, but it’s very simple, so it’s worth trying. edit: note that AppData is a hidden folder by default. You will need to configure to show hidden files:

Yesterday, Gitea user stydxm opened related Issue #8847.

I recommend reading following thread and linked ones in it: Had some similar thoughts in the past.

https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/issues/8849

This is actually very hard to do

It would be really nice to have bridges.

I didn't fix it. I deleted all the mods files, same errors at version 28.

Sometimes... Idk for A28, but in older releases it sometimes worked when I restart/re-login/re-host. I see there's no "STUN" option anymore, too? Idk how Starcraft 1 / Bnet and ShieldBattery works perfectly and not 0AD. Whenever I host, someone types "bete i can't join"... Idk how many people have this issues but this is priority #2 (lag/game performance when higher population is reached - is priority #1). I'll just close 0AD and play other RTS now.

Hey, how long do I need to wait until I see any replays?

There is another idea for using infarty units on ships - Naval Boarding (capturing the ships). l

Not much different from today, where it's either a Cavalry rush in the first 5 minutes, or boom fest until you both max out and attack with masses of CS. Champions are strong, but they are also very expensive. You will need to expand in order to continue making them after your first wave. Maybe not on Mainland balanced, where you have 2 full Metal mines and a couple smaller ones near your first CC. Perhaps that is not "balanced", but what do I know. Even now, fights rarely happen in this period as there is no economic incentive to. You just hurt your economy, when you should be booming. That is what your opponent is doing, and he will have more units by the time your mid game attack comes near his borders. Boom fest in AoE2 can be stopped by Cavalry raids in the mid game. You will be behind if you haven't walled properly. In 0 A.D., walls are more expensive, slower to build and there is no proper wall snapping. How will you defend your 100+ Civilians without an army, before your champions are ready?

Civilians become better lumberjacks after the first wood upgrade, and better miners after the second mining upgrade. Citizen Soldiers are not economically viable anymore and training them puts you behind. So the optimal game plan is either hyper aggression and attack the opponent after a few minutes so they could not wall / build defenses yet, or super defensive and tech to P3 and get to 100+ Civilians before you train only Champions. If you want AoE2 rage forest where there is instantly a lot of fights, then 10-30 minutes of boom, then fighting with endgame units it will be great. If you want fights between late P1 and early P3 to happen it sounds like an awful change.

I'd love to get these in.

Emblem I'm going to add Gaius Marius as a hero: And I'm thinking of rounding out their hero roster with the... Gracchi Brothers: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Gracchi_brothers The Republican Roman civ's only economically focused Hero options. You'd get two Heroes to train, who are a bit weaker than other heroes, instead of the standard 1 hero.

@Stan`was this addressed ? I see your comment in https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4669#203984 : In A26 we added another code path that uses the SDL instead, to check if functionality stays the same so it's okay if that particular code returns unplugged CPUs for now. It's only for the optin hardware detection on https://feedback.wildfiregames.com/ However _SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF is still in current master: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/src/branch/main/source/lib/sysdep/os/linux/lcpu.cpp#L61

I think you are right, I remember that I installed some extra maps in version 25 or 26. I will try to fix it. Thank you very much for help.