All Activity

@hyperion https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BUfQS7Vyi9jUcRVY7M2IW_P4VFA_JUF_/view?usp=drive_link Sharing through drive bc file is too big This happened today. Unfortunately, I didn’t start recording from the beginning, but the behavior is exactly what we mentioned earlier: The game starts, the GUI is responsive, you can select units and buildings and issue commands, but nothing moves and unit production doesn’t start either. The suspected player gets kicked or leaves, and everything starts working normally. In this case, it was reza-math, who often plays in my matches. It could be a "false positive" and just a connection issue. But I think this is the kind of behavior we’ve been seeing more frequently lately. @Atrikcould you confirm this is more or less what are you describing? reza-math is using Windows 10

I downloaded the maps from https://github.com/vpereira/Macedonia_0ad Hopefully all goes well in Alpha 27.1. If not, it might be worth it to download v26 just to play this massive campaign. Thank you very much for taking an enormous amount of time to create it @SciGuy42!

That is what i was thinking, yes.

This unit has been removed from the Britons due to a lack of historical accuracy. No zweihander.

Spartans have an elite swordsman, they were the precedent. Carthaginians, Romans and Seleucids all have advanced infantry swordsmen in their rosters. I don't think it's an issue, but perhaps it's better to give them a swordsman champion? One with a weapon similar to the famous Zweihander, just to be cheeky. EDIT: See https://riseofnations.fandom.com/wiki/Solduri

Sure but why the Germans should have elite swordsmen and other civs not? It is the comparison and the coherence across the different rosters I am referring to.

''Military colony'' type building? And maybe the citizens you train there can build a few more of the Lusitanian/Celtiberian buildings

There might be enough justification for a heavier elite infantry. It is not described what weapons they had; but swords are possible. We know the Cimbrian cavalry used swords. But also the women of the Ambrones, so they don't seem to be only for cavalry.

We worked on some of this in historical and can continue to do more if you think it's necessary! @TheCJ

That's the idea and I think we can even go a bit deeper than simple embassies, as Duileoga made a few good designs:

84 score Reasoning: 0ad anthropologist

Think of it like this: They are too important to chop wood and mine metal or stone. Their experience is much more valued in battle, so they are sent to battle more often by their superiors. Hence, lower gather rates to compensate for this historical truth. And since they spend more time on the field, doing repairs and building army camps, their build speed remains constant.

Dont get me wrong, i build/repair with my elite infantry, i just find it funny that they consider themselves too good to break stone blocks at the stone mine but see no problem laying the same blocks in the construction site . But yeah i see your point.

90 score Reasoning is 665 out of 666, so just a tiny bit below diabolical.

A27 has bug capture for my point of view

66 Reasoning: 314/478

Welcome to a new community activity! The idea is simple: rate the reputation of the player who posted just before you, out of 100. This is all about perception. How well-known are they? Are they respected? Feared? Gameplay style? Loved? Or do they blend into the background like a stealthy NPC? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How to Play: Give a score out of 100 to the player post above you. Not more. Add a short/medium comment or reasoning (funny, honest, vague, savage — just keep it respectful). Then post your message so the next person can rate you. You don’t need to really know the person. First impressions matter too! Let it be known that all here are wise and of sound mind, so no drama shall arise within this forum. However, should any dispute occur, may it be settled in Mainland. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How much would you rate me?

It makes no sense to nerf the build speed. Soldiers in ancient times needed to know how to quickly set up a base camp, repair siege engines on the spot, etc. If anything, they should get a build speed buff with experience, but that wouldn't be balanced.

Citizen soldier gather rates are decreased as they gain experience and upgrade to advanced and elite status. As I see, their building rates are not impacted, is this correct? And is this intentional?

I prefer to capture towers close to the enemy town as well. Capturing Civic centers when possible makes a huge difference i think. And i think my favorite is to capture a Temple in the middle of the enemy town, fight around it, send wounded units into the Temple, rotate them so there are always tlsome troops harassing, and sustain the fight there.

Yes, they are one of the few buildings where it's justified to capture them. Even in real life, the enemy watch towers and other fortifications are usually captured first to provide an advantage. Is it fair that they fall so easily? No. I've recently played an alpha 18 game. Most buildings have at most 15 hack armor, including the Fortress, and capturing wasn't implemented yet. This makes it reasonable to use a swarm of melee units in case you don't have rams. But you still had to have a lot of units and destroy the enemy's army first.

I noticed this too checking the commands per second for the auto clicker on the oddity mod. Would be better. Another thing is resignation at pause. Sometimes players get frustrated e.g. on a long pause to wait for one player of a game that is decided already and resign during pause and leave. The others then wait maybe even more for both to join and if they eventually continue only then find out one actually resigned. Currently saved&loaded, rejoined or late joined games are not stored consistently (maybe to save bandwith at the start). Would be better to have the complete game, e.g. load it if the connection is over a certain quality check or at pause. But it's a huge improvement that specs rarely cause lag.

I love capturing as much infrastructure as possible. I even have an elite force to garrison those structures (my "tower guys", eight elite spearmen with a dedicated ctrl group.) For towers it helps consolidate your conquests and can also help eliminating roaming stragglers, saving you from searching for them. Barracks let me fill up my inf should I loose some, temples just because (and should I need a healing pause), and in most games (depending on the civ I RNGed) I use captured stables to ever increase my cav champs.

capturing also got way too easy with a27... Thing is, if you wanted to raze a city, youd breach the wall and lay a fire. And burning down a house is very easy, but in 0ad only very few units use fire, unlike in reallife, where basically every soldier could start a fire. This results in spearman infantry and ranged infantry being very bad at razing building from the outside, which is why I capture>delete.

Which one do you prefer to do? Why? Why not? For myself, I hate to capture things as I find the mechanic unfair most of the time. It also makes towers useless. Capturing a unoccupied tower, barracks, or a stable is also very easy with a mid-size force. Once you capture the building, 90% of the time, it's best to delete it. Unless it's a Civic Center or enemy tower/Fortress, your best bet is to delete the building. That's why I destroy almost everything except rarely for the towers and Civic Centers.