All Activity

Maybe in theory, but I can tell from experience: There are some hosts which I usually can't join at all. Sometimes it works a bit and some minutes later i drop again. Like jagsusindia and CIA. I regularly see 7 players at a host of CIA, try to join but can't. I can play with the other players fine and they can play with CIA. I can also be in a game with CIA by a different hosts.

I haven't looked at the code yet, but I think we can detect the host closing the match on both sides and send the messages to the bot as usual, as elexis suggested. Or maybe just take note when the game server of the host suddenly disappears before receiving any messages. On the other hand, the case where the client leaves, and the host finishes (and wins) the match on his own is the tricky one. Adding "game start" messages as you suggested would allow us to know which players took part in the game. And if we additionally record clients leaving, we can tell when that situation occurs, and then just accept the game report that the host sends on its own (maybe except if the client was kicked). If we don't want to trust the host with it, we can still just automatically count it as a loss for the client, if he doesn't return within five minutes or so. Well, that could result in some lag, but they still shouldn't repeatedly lose connection entirely.

ModernGUI R28 Update : The top panel is now resizable and support 4 presets that renders well Snapping walls (and palisades) now support snapping to other buildings better More stats, more tooltips, better panels! Direct Download link mod.io GitLab

No we'd go to GLTF, the standard. OBJ doesn't support animations.

Hello everyone... I'm here to share these images of the new weapons and units available so far, starting with the first era: chipped stone, polished stone, and finally copper. We can see all the evolutions of the weapons and units.

It is not just about "a stable internet connection". It depends how far the players are away or how well their isps interact. IMO: The auto-pause on disconnection feature from autociv should get implemented in the main game. Connection, disconnections, pauses should be logged. Logging should be done with timestamps

The problem is that without retrieving reports from all players, we don't know if the game is still in progress. As there is no artificial limit to the duration of games, we'd have to wait a few hours to be reasonably sure it's over.

@Atrik: fix pingall pls Line 15 ChatCommandHandler~autociv.js const ignore = new Set([selfNick].concat(this.botsListIgnore)); const ignore = new Set([selfNick].concat(that.botsListIgnore)); change this to that and add "WFGBot" to botsListIgnore

@Dunedan I made this thread primarily to see whether we could conclude that this is indeed the preferred solution in the first place, or what else. What's your take on this? About the implementation: Your idea of recording the game starts sounds pretty good to me. The rating taking a few hours to update would be suboptimal in my opinion, though, since players might not know or notice that it happens. I guess, better late than never, but maybe we can figure out a way to make it work without such a delay?

It wasn't included in R28 because we were already way to far into the release process by the time I opened the PR. But, yes, the implementations are done, what's left is reviewing, finalising, and eventually merging it. My goal is to get everything into R29. I'm working on it.

Oh it's been implemented, it just needs to be merged for the next version.

thank you, i'm just getting used to moderngui's many changes, but it's good to have this as a backup plan

So this hasn’t been implemented yet… What a shame.

@Perzival12 @Jackerino Add a system for scenario and campaign narratives #8318 Add a speech/dialogue system #8614 Add scenario objectives #7785

Yeah, I learned most of my trigger stuff front reverse engineering the 0 A.D. scripts, which was a long and complicated process. @Vantha, did the cinematic stuff get implemented for R28? Or is it still on the back burner?

OBJ. Super common.

@EilatHere is the Iron Turtoise Deathmatch infinite pop, even though I kind of crashed because of the Han's minister(I tried to move), I had like 1.2k[50PPM] pop and the turtoise had 460(in another game against VH Petra its 620[25PPM]) in min 24, which is actually reasonable. The thing I like about this AI is its able to increase its pop beyond VH Petra, implementing the continue to build houses and army code to Petra would be very nice. Its just that its building one house at a time, maybe doubling it would be extremely funny for the average player(I want to hear them suffer), actually keep that for only the most combatant personailty one. Noted something: It does not build a hero. I see fortress and towers are build near the border but what if you enable it to build in between CC as well as building towers too all over non stop. Imagine my army getting arrowed to the knee from every direction and the further I go in there is still more... hence I need a lot.... of siege to unshell this guy, then again I'm playing on 27.1 and the capture is easy here. Looking at another default setting game(map is large) against VH Petra, this turtle has lower PPM then Medium difficulty[8.5PPM at min 24(I forgot)] which is [7.5PPM] at minute 20 and pretty much stunted there. Who knows... there needs more sample but I'm tired.... So inconclusion as well as extras are added: - Error: It does not build hero - In default setting It has slower PPM below Medium Difficulty, try to fix that one until it reach VH. - It should focus its economy more on stone through trading or technology, since its trying to build lots of towers. - It should tech its defense(murder hole/sentries/upgrade to stone tower) as early as possible before building towers. - Should make wood towers all over its area of influence then eventually upgrade to stone towers to force the player to produce siege or lose lots of unit in the process. - Fortress are to be build at the edge of the border as well as between CCs. Score; In default setting Easy to Medium Difficulty, I'm not forced to use siege to protect against barrage of arrows or to destroy 10th stone tower or the 5fth Fortress then again I'm on version 27.1 which the capture is easy.... however in Deathmatch and max pop its beyond VH Petra late game[>25min] Anyways since protecterate has same logic, I'll not fight it, For the moment VH Petra is my default bot, goodluck. commands.txt

@LienRag @CheckTester I hope this help you a bit. This is how I interpret the Unit Table: In the first table, we have the basic templates from which the others are derived. There, I select the base template I want to filter in order to easily view its stats. For example, I want to get the template for the Ranged Cavalry Javelineer. Then, in the table below, I specify the same unit again. There, the specialized Ranged Cavalry Javelineer units are displayed, along with the civilization they belong to. For example, the template I selected (template_unit_cavalry_ranged_javelineer.xml) has a walk speed of 16.2. In my example, I chose cart/cavalry_javelineer_b from the second table, which belongs to the Carthaginians and shows a Walk Speed of 1.6 (in green). This means that its final walk speed is 16.2 + 1.6 = 17.8. And this number is exactly the one shown in the unit’s tooltip in the Civilopedia. Reveal hidden contents to see the screenthos:

This https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8758 Dedicated server partially solves this problem. When player leaves rated game without previously sending resign -> it is detected and reported. Can be automated to the rating bot. I also think that some grace period needed: players may connect and realize that their networking conditions are not allowing a good gameplay and disconnect or basically drop the connection. Maybe in first 2 minutes this is ok to tolerate.

@AtrikAre you one of these so-called "hero programmers"? And what about increasing the interval of the "Default zoom" a lot? Any time I change a small setting (for example just the sound volume) the game annoys me with the "are you sure"-dialogue.

These two posts from Devereaux illustrate well how the game should make missile work, imho. https://bsky.app/profile/bretdevereaux.bsky.social/post/3mfipjgvmuk24 https://bsky.app/profile/bretdevereaux.bsky.social/post/3mfhpqnp2ac2i

Maurya is too unbalanced, but the rest is interesting indeed.

Even for one civilization, I really don't understand the difference between most units... I get the difference between melee and missile of course, between cavalry and infantry, between spearmen (good again cavalry) and swordsmen (good again siege units), but that's basically all...

To rate games we currently rely on both players "agreeing" about the outcome of the game. That means whenever a rated game ends, 0ad sends a report about its outcome to a bot which is responsible for handling the ratings. Only if the reports of both players match, the game will get rated. This is necessary to prevent players from sending fake reports to manipulate their ratings. In case one of the players disconnects and doesn't come back later, we won't get a report from that player and therefore can't rate the game automatically. The best solution I've come up with so far is to inform the bot already when a rated game starts and about which players participate. Then if only a single report gets received later on, we can wait a few hours and award that player the points. I've described that in more detail in https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/issues/3951#issuecomment-62016 The non-host player loosing the connection and not being able to reconnect afterwards (no matter for what reason) is an interesting edge case I haven't thought about yet.

Have a match history that records rated games that anyone can view and report in game[saparated by version] and the details in it are there: - Map name, type of season, population limit, win condition such and such. - Game number[Individual for each player and the global number]. - Mod used, game will be counted saparately those who use vanilla approved and those who use cheat mod(giving advantage to players). - Duration [Any games thats ends under 15 minute or lower increases the lower it gets, the suspicion of the player]. - Players involve[trust level - your idea to implement - they are the ones who will help report] and their faction played[totalled - individual faction]. - Action Per Minute or Population Per Minute. - Did the game end with surrender/quit? - Was there any vulgar comments being used - flag the match, if so censor but keep it for proof, only the mods can read it. - Score at the end[In player profile, should have average score each game and only counted are above minute 15]. - Locked behind password? However to be honest if they want to exploit rating points by doing such exploit which any games under 10 minutes or it triggers a condition(mods preference) will be flagged, might as well disable their stats and flag the account as smurf by the system, if they want to have unflag their match needs to be reviewed and need to talk it out with the mods. I don't know if my comment is out of reach in the idea or out of topic, if so my bad but I want to contribute however I can.