All Activity

Seems that the patrol icon applies to cavalry.See lower right icon. I missed recognizing this distinction.

My apologies, I group all of the cheats together so I don't consider autostart to have any exception despite it providing a smaller advantage compared to others. My point is that one player shouldn't be allowed to cheat and then when challenged about it, claim that the game "isn't competitive" so its no big deal. The gameplay experience of everyone in the host matters. Autociv still has 1:1 action to input correspondence so I don't think it should be considered a cheat. Cheats like maphacks or progui actually deliver additional capabilities like extra vision or large volumes of management actions for a single gui level input. 1: any time I raise the question about progui before game start (whether it will be disallowed or not) I usually have to explain it to at least 3 to 4 people, others are tired of debates about this and don't invest any of their attention. During this discussion progui users are totally silent and do not respond do inquiries about their mod usage. Usually at least one person is outraged, but they quickly realize that there's nothing they can do about it. If enough people in the host express concern about progui before game start, the progui user will break silence and verbally attack the person who raised the issue with words I can not put on the forum. This serves to derail conversation about the mod. Additionally there are also dishonest people who claim that the scripted autotrainer is "equivalent" to vanilla autoqueue which is mathematically false. 2: There aren't really any stats on the summary which illustrate directly the advantages provided by automation, so players (even good ones) mistakenly believe that their usage of vanilla autoqueue or manual batch training is as efficient. I've advocated for cumulative barracks/stable/cc idle time statistics before. Additionally players do not realize how much of their mental capacity manual batch training consumes because its a practiced action that they are used to doing every game, so they underestimate how much extra time a progui user has.

I'm sure someone else has got a more informed solution, but just to rule out the obvious/easy ones: have you tried reinstalling the game? Have you checked that the drivers for your graphics card are updated?

This seems to happen outside of atlas as well:

Jein (yes + no). You'll want an army composition that can beat your enemy, and for that you need dps (damage per second). Spears and pikes are good against cav and for holding enemy melee; if you have only those they'll get shot up by the enemy's dps dealers. Inversely you can snipe their dps dealers with yours (by default they attack the closest units). [I'll now report you to the mod team for not being a spammer so your noob post limit gets lifted.]

100% 0adopeamine This is even better than the last one.

I meant for defensive building like Forts and Towers. My only purpose is to increase their fire. When the building almost destroyed, the units inside it will come out. So, I think melee soldiers can buy more time than squishy rangers. I know turtling is a lame strategy. However, I'm still opened for more tips and tricks.

You'll never be able to have flawless code, but you can always build stronger code and better anti-cheat protection. This is the case with maphack, which afaik have been fixed in the latest version. Furthermore, saying that 0 A.D. is insecure just because it's open source is like saying Windows is more secure than Linux because it's closed. Security doesn’t depend on hiding the code, but on how the system is designed and what measures are in place to protect it. Not exactly true. Most—if not all—GUI changes are made by modifying the contents of the GUI folder without even touching the simulation folder. True. And I'm not in favor of enforcing any mandatory system for using certified mods or restricting mods. I'm in favor of making information about which mods are being used by all players in a match (whether signed via mod.io or verified in any other way) available to all players—or at least to the host—of the match. After that, each host can set their own rules. Yes, it’s a big challenge. And yet, here we are enjoying an incredible game developed by a community of developers and players that moves forward in many areas through discussion and consensus.

Yeah.

I really appreciate that you guys took the time to verbally appreciate my memes. I'll now make a few more, with a progressively declining standard of quality.

I don't know why you would want more HP inside a building. Note that most buildings don't fire arrows. I sometimes use them to warp my ranged units to the far side (garrison, set rally point on the other side, release) so they don't get torn to pieces by enemy melee, or just to save wounded units (threshold set to 50%). If you have any more questions people here usually give good answers. There's also plenty of guides (text & vid) to build order, eco(nomy), strategy etc.

Well, that makes me look like a big ol' fool. I take that back and apologize; I actually totally forgot about the market exploit, please forgive me. ...But talking about how the other side doesnt even want to have a real discussion is certainly not shifting the topic, right? Alright, but as long as 0ad is open source, you cant enforce anything really. If a cheater really wants to cheat, he can build the game with some of his own code injected. Now, making it so you would atleast have to do that "injection", to be able to cheat, would still be an effective deterrent for many cheaters, but if done wrongly, could also hurt the developement of "non-cheat"-mods, like GUI changes (even if they are just resizing buttons, you change the simulation folder afaik, so youd be flagged incompatible by the current modio rulings? So if we somehow made it impossible to play with mods flagged incompatible in modio, I couldnt make any changes to my gui, as harmless as they may be, without injecting it before building the game, which would be a significant detriment to the modding aspect of the game) [tl;dr: Restricting mods further hurts modding.] So enforcing a consensus (if we could reach one) is quite a challenge, isnt it? I agree with you. I would consider using autostart to be pretty embarrassing. Good thing the only cheat I use is autociv, which seems to be generally accepted. I was not trying to defend people using autostart (they shouldnt), but rather trying to lay out why I dont care whether they do. Some people take games too seriously and try to get any advantage they can, be it fair or not. Thats embarrassing for them, but as an opponent, I dont really care if its at the level of autostart (or proGUI), since the advantage they gain is so insignificant that it doesnt actually affect me at all. Now, if you dont use autostart or proGUI to gain an advantage, but rather to change how the game feels to you and maximise your fun, it even ceases to be embarrassing. This is an assumption that one player makes about 7 others. And when they find out they lost because someone was cheating, the answer is "chill out its just a game". Awesome argument guys. Ripping my comment about autostart out of context to make it appear like I was talking about all cheats doesnt make it look like you are actually... (The difference is, you have never lost because of autostart, while it is possible you lost because of other cheats. And thats why I wouldnt say "nobody cares" about the other cheats.) This is a very interesting argument. May I ask on what grounds you say that 1. Most players that encounter players with "cheats" (e.g. proGUI, autostart, autociv) are unaware of the cheats 2. The people that are aware of the cheats cant grasp the magnitude of advantage [because I think almost all of the consistent long-term players know about proGUI, autostart and ofc autociv. And I dont know any user of those cheats that likes to play against newbies that dont know about them. And that the autotrainer function provides any statistically relevant advantage still remains to be proven.]

Thanks for the reply. Since all garissoned soldiers add same fire power, now I think it's better to place melee units inside a building since they are greater in HP.

Hi @vanz, welcome to the forums. Any units with blades will obliterate rams, in dire need use women (daggers); swarming them also keeps them from reaching their targets. To get started you can lower the difficulty of the AIs or set their behavior so they won't crash your base. All garrisoned soldiers add the same amount of arrows.

Hello, newb here . Han is my favorite faction recently. I'm usually start the game with turtling and slow development, but AI always break my defense within 20 minutes. Especially when they started to using rams. What units can destroy rams quickly? Also, I still wondering about garrison and fire power. Does ranged units like archers and crosbowmen have advantage over melee units when they are inside a building, ships, and siege tower? Or all units just share same fire power based on their counts?

Too epic. lol for 2 min straight.

I don't do it because of any threats. I just believe that hosts being able to set their game rules is normal.

“Thanks for clarifying this, Atrik, that explains why I couldn’t find any campaign either. I’m also running 0 A.D. on Linux and thought I was missing a step. Good to know it’s not included by default. I’ll have a look at the mods you mentioned for some single-player content. Appreciate the info!”

It is true you (usually) do not use your mod when I host (or other hosts) tell you not to use it. But I would hardly say that doing this is changing your behavior to address other players’ concerns if you only do it under threat of a room ban.

For the record do play with host rules, so when @chrstgtr or other hosts ask me to, i don't use trainer. Probably another lie necessary to create the myth, so one need to revise the reality. The problem is just that not you couldn't get all hosts to do this but that's just another thing.

I'm using RC-3 and WIndows 11. The archers in Atlas editor look like this by default. I am not using any mods to change the graphics. Give that I am a total cosmic noob at Windows, I probably messed up something simple. Here are the logs and my user.cfg user.cfgcrashlog.txtcrashlog.dmpuserreport_hwdetect.txtsystem_info.txtmainlog.html

This is clearly wrong. @guerringuerrin has already pointed this out as "awareness." I would go further to say this is actually multitasking, which @borg- has already identified as the primary skill in R(eal)T(ime)S(trategy) games. It is also not just "repetitive meaningless actions." First, your mod doesn't repeat the same thing. It optizimies based on how many you can make to reach your ideal population composition. Without the mod, you would have to decide what batch size to make and of what units to make. At all times, do you know how many jav inf you have at all times? Do you know how many sword cav you have at any moment? Do you know how many slingers you need to make to reach your ideal population percentage? I don't know. But I can make guesses informed by experience (i.e., skill). Your mod does this all for you. If you truly want something to eliminate repetitive clicks then that already exists as part of the base game. You have created something that does more and creates a competitive advantage. Most importantly, you've been told other players don't like it and choosing to use it anyways

Indeed Boudica. Not even the market exploit is considered a cheat. Reza knows about quickstart, Seleucids knows reza considers it a cheat. I think its quite distasteful bringing up war or PTSD here. Reza had this stance before the war already. Reza probably doesn't really care but bringing this up does not show a interest in a reasonable discussion. Instead the sanity of the conversational partner is attacked.