All Activity

When I was originally advocating to implement unit acceleration I was suggesting it only for cav. It seems people wanted it for infantry as well so here we are. @Seleucids of course any nerf to cav speed would need to be proportional and take the full gameplay result into consideration, so forgetting to update archer and firecav move speed would be an obvious mistake rather than something inevitable.

Don't you worry, there is so much lag in networked games (especially more than 2 players) that dancing is non-existent. Sadly they do need this speed to counter fire cav and archer. All in all, I think champions occupying 3 population each is probably agreeable. If you want to make 30 champion cavs then you bascially have no pop space for anything else. If there is objection to moving them to fort, maybe we can consider other special buildings. I picked fort because that was the champion building in the past and was expensive enough to counter rich players spamming it.

The speed in combination with the similar strength is in deed the point. They can ignore their counter. Also selecting wounded and pulling them out works good because of their speed. I also thought of having them slowly change the direction and having a fast end speed after a acceleration time or so. Also on the topic of "dancing": I think running back in (small) zigzag is no abuse. Units don't have to run in a line back like Rickon Stark did under arrow fire. But of course this works great on fast units with sudden change of directions. Dancing in itself can be abuse though. But in this case it just makes sense

Other games do this effectively by increasing the population cost of more powerful units. To be honest, I'm not sure why 0 A.D. doesn't do this. For example, making Seleucid Cataphracts take up 3 population slots is a sensible solution to what's the most broken unit of the game at the moment. Just see my match against Rome, where I didn't lose a single one out of 41 (!) Cataphracts. Also, making other champion units take up at least 2 slots is a better option than re-purposing Forts.

I’m not saying they should be the same speed as everything else, just that they don’t need to be so much faster. A gap of 50% faster would be perfectly fine, currently mace champ cave are 240% the speed of spears. we need to do some more broad speed balancing tbh.

As soon as you nerf the champ cavs, the champ infs will become OP. It's only a matter of time. Naked fanatics are already en route to becoming the next broken unit but it's just that Gaul players have not spammed it enough for people to notice yet. ok this is good idea These are the exact reasons why champion cavs should exist why they should be made in a game. We don't want these strengths to vanish, at any means. My whole idea is to put a soft limit onto the number of these that can appear. That's all. The focus is actually not fortresses but the constraining the rate of production of champion units.

That's what I thought. The weird thing is I had ffm_4k, ffm_visibility, feldmap, so reliable tested mods. Ricci had ranged overlay. But I was the only one OOS. Maybe everyone else had it too.

As usual, @real_tabasco_sauce talking some sense

The range visualisations shouldn't affect the game state when computing simulations, right? It is a pure visual element. Therefore it shouldn't be a part of OOS. The same applies for alarms suppression queue, which shouldn't be reported as OOS if it's different for each player.

Forts should be effective for defense, not an expensive barracks. If they are “useless” right now, work should be done to make their use for defense more effective. Forts should be for defense primarily, with some able to train heroes, unique units (champs), and unique, special technologies. I remember alphas where people would make more than 6 forts just to spam champs, and it became frustrating trying to find space to place them because of the build distance requirement. also let me stress this really important point: there are no complaints about infantry champions, save for immortals being a bit OP in the ranged form. all the complaints are about champcav, so how about we calm down a bit and focus of the specific units that are problematic instead of “moving fast and breaking things” so to speak. why are champcav OP? - high damage, high hp? Sure, but it is not much more than infantry champions, and they cost a lot more. But really the comparison with champion infantry is flawed, champcav will almost never need to fight champion spearmen. - mobility? I think this is the underlying cause as much as others want to deny it. We are talking about units that are double the speed of their supposed counter, units that may not be surrounded, trapped, or outplayed except by a larger or faster cav army. Because you can choose your fights endlessly, champcav players can bank up resources while raiding and retrain fast enough to justify taking bad fights. Additionally, since they move faster, they take less damage from buildings. if you are really adamant to try this, why not set up a PR in the com mod to organize some play testing. I think I’ve seen enough of the current com mod changes to get an idea of what might work in the future regarding capture balance, so we can move forward with a new version if you like.

So they should have wooden bosses. K, I’ll add them in the future.

You can play all slings, it's not weak, some players do that, but that's not as effective as a mixed army. Playing Britons every day, I find that 40 slingers + 40 javs + 50 spearman is the best combination. Reason: pathfinding + dmg output + snipe Athenians is also better when mixed with jav cav and merc javs. In A27, siege weapons seem quite unecessary unless your enemy is ultra turtle with towers, forts and walls. You can capture CC with any army after they lose, no need for using slings to smash. I find beating their defence army more important than using siege to knock down buildings.

This is what I was doing if image helps: Walls did nothing. It was letting me place walls almost in the water (water line was up side of wall). Maybe some quirk of random map generator

Change for the sake of change is useless. 0 A.D. is already unique in other ways.

Thanks for the report, but the dump difference shows that you have a behavior difference in GUIInterface enabling range visualizations (for attacks, auras, and healers). This is definitely caused by one of your mods (I suppose it's Ricci's "rangedoverlay" mod, but if you're the one OOS, it can be one of your mods). You folks should stop abusing the compatibility checks system, or at the very least test RCs without mods.

If you want to be aggressive, you can be aggressive with CS army. However, you shouldn't be allowed to mass OP army and stay aggressive. OP army is a late game army. This has nothing to do with the build. If you want OP units, you'd have to build an OP building.

I agree 100%. This will also need to be adjusted for the AI, and it will allow it to use the champions earlier (as soon as it builds a Fort). The change is good for historical accuracy. Most soldiers were pretty average and 80% of them had lower-tier equipment. Elite soldiers were kept as a part of separate battalions/legions. Also, new players will adjust better to the gameplay, as the mental image will be: 1) Barracks/Stables are used for citizen soldiers, 2) Forts and other special buildings train champions. I support this for Release 28.

There is a limit when it comes to balancing units civ to civ. It is entirely fine that some civs champions counter another’s. What matters is the overall power of the civ. There will always be bad matchups bad maps for a given civ and that is a mark of good civ differentiation.

Hello, I don't know if you found a solution, or maybe someone else will try to find a solution. But in my case, I use the flatpak solution supported by wildfire games. It works well. you can use the above link given by player of 0ad : or you can run the command : flatpak install flathub com.play0ad.zeroad

They are aware: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2345520

Hey Jan Thanks for reaching out. Unfortunately we only notify maintainers about new releases. We do not have control about what they do with the information. Usually fedora is pretty fast to update, maybe they forgot about it? In any case I suppose you could look up the maintainer and send them an email ?

rated team games.

Melee will end you. Ok, you'd still need melee units. But wouldn't you agree that britons and athens can be played without champions or siege without being up civs because of the slingers?

Very nice! Thank you @Vantha! Works with both A27 and also with SVN (future B28).

First, thank you for having the game published on dnf. I don't use snap/flatpak/etc., so that's my preferred way for installing apps. When I was installing today I am getting 0.0.26-30. 0.27 has been released 4 months ago, but somehow it is still not in dnf. Maybe some deploy job simply failed and publish got stuck... How many days/months of delay vs recent release should user expect when using dnf?