All Activity

Textual Communication and Intent Reza argues that his "toxic" words are "mostly jokes or trolling with friends who don't mind." This highlights a key challenge in online gaming: the lack of non-verbal cues. In a face-to-face conversation, you have tone of voice, facial expressions, and body language to convey sarcasm or a friendly jab. Online, all of that is stripped away. What might be a "joke" to him could easily be perceived as a direct insult by the recipient, especially to someone who isn't a close friend. This isn't just a matter of misunderstanding. The responsibility of clear communication falls on the sender. When a message is sent in a public forum/lobby/game, it's not a private conversation. The audience is everyone, and they don't have the context of his friendships. Therefore, what he considers a joke is still toxic behavior in a broader sense because it creates a negative and hostile environment for other players who are not in on the "joke." The recipient cannot be expected to know his intent. Justification and Responsibility Reza justifies his toxicity by saying, "Yes I'm toxic when somebody trolls me when I lose a game which is very annoying. anybody would be like that." This is an attempt to rationalize his behavior as a normal and understandable reaction. While it's true that frustration is a common human emotion, the way we express it is a choice. Resorting to insults and slurs is not an inevitable or acceptable response. Many people get frustrated in games but don't lash out at others. Blaming his behavior on the actions of others ("somebody trolls me") is a classic defense mechanism that avoids taking full responsibility for his own words and actions. His statement about muting 90% of players who troll him is a positive step, as it shows an awareness that he needs to manage his own reactions. However, it doesn't erase the impact of his past or present behavior on the community. Moderation and Consequences Reza's final points challenge the authority of the moderators and the fairness of the punishment. He argues that moderators should have limitations and that punishment should be based on the "level of toxicity." The analogy of the teacher and the student is flawed. A student failing an exam is an academic outcome, not a behavioral one. A better analogy would be a student disrupting the class, cursing at the teacher, and bullying other students. In that case, the teacher (or school administration) absolutely has the right to remove the student from the classroom or even the school for the well-being of the other students and the learning environment. Similarly, moderators are there to enforce community guidelines and ensure a positive environment for all players. Their opinions are based on the observable evidence of his communication, which you have provided in your report. The punishment is not arbitrary; it's a response to a documented pattern of behavior that disrupts the community. His behavior, as you've detailed, includes a high percentage of insults, slurs, and aggressive language, which makes it a high-level infraction that warrants disciplinary action. Ultimately, while Reza's response sheds light on his perspective and feelings, it doesn't negate the fact that his actions constitute toxic behavior. His words, regardless of his intent, have a negative impact on the community, and that is what moderators are tasked with addressing.

Ur obsarvation is based on words. Thouse words mostly are jokes or trolling with friends who dont mind with my jokes. Yes im toxic when somebody trolls me when i lose a game which is vey annoying. anybody would be like that. anyway i muted 90% of players who troll me. Then i am less toxic compared to past years. Moreover even if im toxic it doesnt mean a mod have right to do whatever he wants and punish based on his oponions. There should be limitations for moderators as well. Also the punishment should be based on level of toxicity. If you are a teacher and a student fail in an exam you would fire him for ever from your class?

For me we should mute only people speak or act bad in lobby general, the rest is NO RULES. Moderators must have the trust of the team to act as they see fit regarding harmful actions on the general lobby. In reasonable proportions (no permanent or long bans), the community is too small and it is better that the bad player uses the same account. I don't mind being around toxic people, as long as they play fair (don't surrender without reason, for example). If it annoy you, you can use the mute feature.

"My observation is that 'reza' tends to be toxic. I believe 'MarcAurel' is fair and should continue to moderate in that way. A report from someone who has been punished and is often aggressive may not be considered credible." Summary "Reza-math" exhibits highly toxic behavior, characterized by aggressive, repetitive insults that dominate 70% of interactions. The data reveals a pattern of frustration-fueled toxicity: neutral strategy calls (30%) give way to profanity and blame after setbacks (e.g., losses trigger 2–3x more slurs). Common themes include skill-shaming ("noob" in 16% of messages) and personal jabs, with sexist/homophobic slurs amplifying harm. Repetition (e.g., 26% looped phrases) suggests trolling or emotional dysregulation. Overall, this player's communication erodes community positivity, potentially violating game ToS on harassment. Positive notes: Rare acknowledgments like "wp" (well played) appear in wins, but they're outnumbered 15:1 by negatives. Full report to moderators on request only...

@Stan` I would like to raise some concerns about the way moderation is handled by MarcAurel in 0 A.D. I feel his decisions are sometimes inconsistent and too personal, which can negatively affect the community. For example, when someone insults him directly, he reacts strongly. In one case, I was muted for an entire week because I used the word “retard” against him. Similarly, DoctorOrgans was banned for calling him “passive aggressive soyboy.” While I understand that moderators should act against offensive language, the punishment lengths are not clearly defined in 0 A.D., and it seems that harsher actions are taken only when the insult is directed at him personally. At the same time, other players such as Atric frequently insult me and DoctorOrgans (often because we accuse him of cheating), yet no moderation action is taken against them. This gives the impression that MarcAurel enforces rules selectively, protecting his friends while punishing his critics. Another issue is that cultural differences are not taken into account. What is considered offensive in one culture may not necessarily be so in another. For example, calling someone “passive aggressive soyboy” may sound like an insult to him, but in my view it is more of a description of behavior or lifestyle than an insult. A moderator should be aware that players come from many different cultures and apply rules fairly, not based on personal feelings. Overall, I believe moderation should be impartial and consistent, applied equally to all players regardless of personal relationships. While previous moderators like Nortse_Harlod also had their flaws, I still found them more balanced compared to MarcAurel. My hope is that moderation in 0 A.D. can become more transparent, fair, and community-focused.

What about expanding the Reforms tech to unlock a champion skirmisher though? Currently you get the legionary swordsmen and skirmisher, but only the first cohort swordsmen, it seems like a first cohort skirmisher would complete the roster as then you can either have a complete first cohort force or a regular one. Centurions I was thinking it would be great if they could swap between javelin and sword so they could lead either unit type without getting left behind by the skirmishers when they do so.

I am open to recommendations

Yes, it should. Using a VPN would be another option. Also check out the FAQ entry regarding this topic https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/wiki/FAQ#what-shall-i-do-when-joining-multiplayer-matches-fails-with-an-error-message In that case you just require a public IP address from somebody else (Cloudflare in your example). Some kind of public endpoint at which a host is available at will always be necessary. In future we might improve the situation by also supporting IPv6, but that brings its own set of challenges. See https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/issues/4301 for details. You can join games where servers are hosted on public IPs without NAT being involved. That's true for Minecraft, Wuthering Waves, as well as 0ad hosts who do proper port forwarding.

Engine.QuickSave and QuickLoad might make the trick for you if you want to return to a point in game, example : when the overlay is closed, return to the point of when it got opened. It's instantaneous.

My other thought is that if we can improve the engine such that we no longer demand a public IP. Could hosting players use a service like Cloudflare to expose their hosts? With the current setup, I was able to join Minecraft servers and other multiplayer games like Wuthering Waves. Perhaps we can learn something from them? I could join hosts who have enabled Stun and port forwarded their own router. But for hosts who don't have any of these, there is no chance of joining.

My new ISP doesn't give me a static public endpoint / IP, which made me unable to join any hosts. I just get stuck on the "connecting to server" forever. To pinpoint the exact issue, I modified the engine code to see at exactly which step I got stuck at, and the outputs are the following: The ISP does not offer a static public IP service but it does offer a dynamic public IP service for an additional charge of €3/month. My question is: would buying this upgrade allow me to join hosts like normal? Also are there easier, free methods which can help me get around this problem? I have forwarded the ports on my router but nobody was willing / able to join my host. Also the network connection is simply not stable enough for me to host confidently. The overall load in the community seems to affect my perceived speed and latency. Previously, I did have a static public IP with endpoints and port forwarding support so I had no issues.

Check the cinematic intro. (I have not played this campaign or version of the game).

Indeed, I’ve been using it on most of my SP games and it’s really been so easy. I tried it on Danubius and was really so easy against 2 hardest AI and occasional raids from AI. I guess Jebel Barkal would be the same except probably the AIs can’t survive.

Hannibal my son , yuo are men now Yu must choose wife and have Carthaginians colonizers chrilden. You must pick butifel Aritshat or an Iberian princess Himilce I brought you from local barbarian village.

Red - Romans Blue - Athenians Orange - Iberians Yellow - Carthaginians Purple - Han Cyan - Britons ( because cyan is my favorite color and britons is my favorite civ, so maybe this doesn't count ) Is it normal to associate colors with literally everything? I can keep going: Monday - Blue Tuesday - Light brown Wednesday - Green Thursday - Dark brown Friday - Light blue Saturday - Yellow Sunday - Orange Zero - White One - Black Two - Blue Three - Yellow Four - Purple Five - Red Six - Light brown Seven - Dark brown Eight - Orange Nine - Yellow Ok, maybe I got too personal there.

A complete technology design must be done. Always in the technology trees, there must be economic, military, civic and religious technologies (support units). Economics must improve resource efficiency and health. Improve units and structures as well as mechanics (components). Speed and capacity and also for each in general bonus of gathering for each resource. The only missing thing in this one is the speed of the villagers. Military is divided into many, defense and attack both structures and units. Increase LoS (Line of Sight).Here you can divide by structures into military, civil and support units. Defensive structures include CC. Here you can play with armor, HP, attack range, number of arrows, (there are several things are implemented). In the blacksmith it is quite complex, it would need to have a post. Special technologies. Those that go in the Fortress or the Wonder. For late game. Naval technologies, similar to economic and military ones. Unique technologies of civilization. Technologies of the civilization group, all those shared by related/parent civilizations. Religious, which are like civic, can improve the temple, the priests and even the soldiers, it is more like the spiritual psychological part of civilization. Civic tech on how civicization is organized and It speaks volumes about the identity of a civilization, whether they live in a kingdom, a republic, a nomad, or an oligarchy. This goes for government centers, libraries, etc. Technologies for components, such as capturing and handling frontier the civics area of influence. Technologies to develop the hero.

Unit specific techs are an untapped treasure trove of gameplay value. I don't think we should get rid of the blacksmith techs of course, but I think unit specific techs could have more creativity in addition to rewarding focus on unit compositions.

I've asked @Vantha to look at that ticket.

Yeah that scheme would be super nice. If it can be doable via mod I can certainly put specific techs together in com mod.

There's the idea of having unit-specific techs, but I think they should wait for: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/issues/7666

Right after this, I'm imagining that Hamilcar says something like, "Use our ships to scout the coastline for a good harbor!" But your ships are attacked and sunk immediately by Iberian fire ships when your ships venture outside the landing zone, lol.

Voice acting could be challenging.

This would help with trailers We only use the cinematic features for camera controlling purposes.

Regarding voicelines, they would indeed be neat, but not being able to make them shouldn't be reason not to create singleplayer content. I too would be in favor of voicelines being spoken in ancient languages, that would also save the trouble of having to translate them into different languages. The only problem is that that will just work for Latin and Greek, many of the other languages are too incomplete to write (and then speak) full sentences and texts in them. I think there has been a misunderstanding. What I am currently working on and was talking about earlier is something like this mockup: When I wrote "dialogue" above, I was referring to speech, the possibility to make characters of a story talk. I think the game shouldn't be paused while a cutscene like this is running. What I settled with is to provide two options and leave it up to individual scenarios whether to disable hovering, selecting and giving commands or not, but always let the player move around the camera. And by the way, yes, the narrative overlay I opened the PR for already pauses the game behind it.

If you replay the match, does it crash?