All Activity

Yeah, I never look at stats in game. But making them completely hidden, including on the structure tree is just hiding the ball. It's something that is frustrating about some techs like the Mace Silver Shield. I shouldn't need to go into the directory to understand how different units differ from one another or how a tech impacts units. This is especially annoying when stats like spread (accuracy) or projectile velocity vary from one unit (or building) to another. There's literally no reason for it

Or learn by just reading the tooltip that says that Light Cavalry does bonus damage to monks?

1)Yes the sword icon and number display dps. 2)Why Redundant would mean it's displayed elsewhere? I like to have it clear when some units are trying to chase others (like cavs) to see if enemy have a speed bonus, or just base unit movement. 3)The screenshots scale the icons a bit. In game they look perfect for me. That being said, the stats calculated and displayed here are from base template and unit state. This means you, or anyone could extract theses parts of ModernGUI and tweak/play around with it, without having to import too much of it's code. Probably easier then starting from the vanilla panel if you have an idea of what you want to do. @TheCJ I hate when a games hide stats. Feels like they think your too dumb to compare numbers. In mods like Historical I would go crazy if I couldn't read stats, and having fast/easy way to understand the stats are even more critical.

I actually agree with you here. The game had some tips in earlier alphas that had listed counters for every unit, but never descriptive text like in AoE2 games. Also, we had this in early alphas. The gather rates, in particular, were shown just as "Bonus in gathering food" for females and "Bonuses in gathering wood, stone and metal" for male soldiers in the tooltips. Maybe we can return to those days of showing the bare minimum of stats, but told the info in tooltips? In any case, it needs to be consistent with the overall UI design.

Well, the art is nice. But we could remove every number (resistance, percentage, gather rate) from the players view and it would not matter too much

What is much more desireable is a short description of their role in combat (if there isnt one already? Would the encyclopedia contain smt like this? I dont know tbh). Like "The Spearman is a versatile melee unit especially strong against cavalry, but weak against siege units.", "The pikeman is a heavily armoured melee unit with relatively low damage but long range.", "The Swordsman is an offensive melee unit with high damage but a short range. It excels at taking out siege." Much more useful for new players.

Going by your logic, we don't need to show anything. Let's just play the game blindly and have fun, ey?

Do new players need to know? And do you think not knowing about the hack damage of halbs made the veteran play worse?

1) Does the number beside the sword icon show the current total damage, or some derivative stat like DPS? It should show all damage types, because of the way damage reduction is calculated in 0 A.D. Example: (sword icon) 3.8 (arrow icon) 6.0 On mouse hover: Damage: 3.0 + 0.8 hack / 5.0 + 1.0 pierce This way, we can also show upgrades cleanly, without cluttering the UI. 2) Movement speed stat is redundant here, no need to show it on combat stats. 3) The icons that are showing resistance levels should look a bit nicer. Too much blue. Perhaps it could look better like this: (gray armor icon similar to AoE2 or AoM) 4/4/15 On mouse hover over the armor icon: Resistance: 3+1 hack (34%) / 3+1 pierce (34%) / 15 crush (79%) You don't need to know it by the time you've learned the game. But new players need to know, and even one of the veterans didn't know about the hack damage of halberdiers. So, more obvious display of stats is desirable.

I like the way vanilla does it. You dont need to know any damage or resistance numbers, really. Atleast not of your own units while playing. Either you know how to use your units, then that knowledge is way more useful than a damage stat, or you dont, in which case the stat wont really help you. And you shouldnt see your enemies upgrades anyway. If anything, you should find out about them by doing some sort of spy tech. So not showing the units stats at all is perfectly fine, and having the option to look at a breakdown of all stats is useful if you want to strategy-craft, make balance-change mods or just calculate stuff for fun.

I prefer that the more stats possible are displayed and not having some hidden. But @guerringuerrin indeed, It would be nice to not look like in this meme you posted every time you need to figure out what is the stats of a unit, or how much upgrades enemy has. And the tooltip with the 40 stats vomit could/is still available, just the breakdowns are much faster to read / easier to understand.

This is an example for the opposite point because in aoe2 there are lots of different hidden stats per unit that aren't shown. Its actually a great system to only show the basic stats of the unit, because showing all the stats would take up too much space and cloud out critical basic stats that can change with upgrades. I'd say going from this: To this: Is definitely an improvement in that direction

This is an example for the opposite point because in aoe2 there are lots of different hidden stats per unit that aren't shown. Its actually a great system to only show the basic stats of the unit, because showing all the stats would take up too much space and cloud out critical basic stats that can change with upgrades. Players in aoe2 actually learn the massive variety of different unit and civ specific bonuses and technology effects without having to see them. For example the light cav doesn't say that it has +10 versus monks which is essential for gameplay, but players simply learn this by doing (or looking at wikis/tutorials).

The flatpak should have had the update for a while. Maybe try flatpak update in your terminal if the software center is acting strange.

Interesting breakdown! It's cool to see how the civ roster evolved over time, especially with the splits starting in Alpha 10. Helps give more historical depth to each faction.

0 A.D. had a pre-planned roster of civilizations, that was fulfilled by Alpha 9. Starting with Alpha 10, Hellenes civilization was split into Spartans, Athenians and Macedonians. Additionally, the team decided to include more civilizations. Original civilizations are: Hellenes Celts (split into Gauls and Britons in Alpha 11) Iberians Carthaginians Persians Romans

Here:

market is fixable ? and how

This is perfectly fine to do if its not a arranged pump of two players. Bad: 2 players decide to split the cheat one sells 100 batches of food for wood - sends the wood to the other player only for him to sell it for food in 500 batches. Normal: As a player notice good prices at the market and decide to convert resources for profit. Bad: Have a bot checking price fluctuations and automate converting resources at good prices

Sure I guess one thing is to use the market another to exploit a vulnerability. I guess the important thing is this has been noticed and could be a fix of its mechanic to avoid this kind of exploits in the future

Yes but if another player do the first part of trade, you are the second player and you need use the market...

I think it becomes very evident when someone sell one Resource to buy another, incurring clear and significant losses, only to later use the second Resource (which was purchased very inefficiently) to buy back the first one or other assets with exorbitant yield rates. As can be seen in the Cube screenshot from the first message in this thread. And one could say the same kind of technique was used here: So the question is: why would someone make such inefficient trades, only to quickly reverse them with the exact same trade in the opposite direction? So if my math is correct, what Arup did was: First Trade 2800 Food for 1462 Wood Secondly Trade 2000 Wood for 3940 Food So u can do the maths 3940 - 2800 = 1140 FOOD 2000 - 1462 = 538 Wood And in the end is like he trade 538 Wood for 1140 Food. Which is like get 211 Food for every 100 Wood

are we sure it normal ? its depend the game , if the wood have a big value compare food.. if one player really need food and have too much wood.. what he has to do finally? how he is supposed to know its cheat or no cheat

The old 0 A.D. start screen/menu (alpha 6 Fortuna).

Thanks @ffm2 for noticing this. So I dug into this bug and this is actually due to a typo in vanilla, while ModernGUI have the correct identifier "barterEfficiency" instead of the misspelled "barterEfficency" found in vanilla summary. Edit: Nobody will makes a PR for a typo I guess so I've just overwritten the faulty function so its fixed anyways for ModernGUI.