All Activity

Do you also have triarii units? I guess that could be useful not to just lose spearmen.

The game does have "ruins" in many scenarios, which provide stone. The problem would be to take care of a more seamless transition between all kinds of buildings and their corresponding ruins. Maybe later on all these concepts could be unified in a coherent framework, but right now unbuilding/unproducing seems the simplest way. The game already includes Loot from killed units. Realistically, to the victor should belong the spoils, but as you say, in a game like this it's hard to determine when a battle ends, thus individual opportunism is what's accounted for.

I would find it "logistically" more "realistic" and tactically more "interesting" if destroyed buildings, no matter if self-destructed the enemy's, would turn into "mines" containing the resources which have to be explicitly gathered and brought to one's storehouses. Also a battlefield could turn into "mines" with the "loot", like scouring the field after the battle looking for usable stuff, although it's hard to determine when a battle "ends". Would change balancing heavily against rushers/attackers in far away foreign territory though. Instead of "mines", the resources could also turn into those bonus-/treasure-item-like things, although those don't have to be brought to one's storehouses.

You could check out what we did with <SpecificName>Hastātus</SpecificName> for rome. My understanding is early on they were similar to hoplites in kits and then they evolved into swordsmen. So in p1 Hastatus = spearman and then it is replaced in p2 by Hastatus = swordsman infantry_swordsman_b.xml infantry_spearman_b.xml

Well the game already does it for "hoplites" they have a mixin that allows all hoplites to have phalanx formation. <Identity> <Classes datatype="tokens">Hoplite</Classes> <Tooltip>Hoplites can use phalanx formation</Tooltip> <History>Hoplites were the very symbol of Hellenic prestige and citizenship, armed with a spear and a large round bronze-coated shield known as an aspis. Armor was heavy, with bronze helmets and a cuirass of either bronze or linen, in addition to greaves. Hoplites fought in a tight formation called a phalanx, guarding each other with their shields while they attacked the enemy with their 2.5 meter spear or short iron sword.</History> </Identity> just add a visable class <Identity> <VisibleClasses datatype="tokens">Athenian</VisibleClasses> <Tooltip>A true citizen of Athens.</Tooltip> </Identity>

I think the point could be to keep selectable options limited and uniform among civs, while allowing for actual differentiation and evolution if wanted. I've come across this issue so many times, and one has to end anachronistically simplify things, which could indeed be solved if "a unit can represent more than just the soldiers equipped in the exact same way". For example, the Athenians had hippotoxotai (cavalry archers) substituted by prodromoi ("scouts") in the first half of the 4th c. BC. With the proposal, both could appear, depending on progress, but the icon, or just the "generic" name, could be the same, and quite common for most civs (Mounted Skirmisher could be an option), but the actual model would change (among civs and with progress), have different stats, and the "particular" unit name also be written somewhere, but the "generic" name would tell you basically its function. Other examples I came across just this last week is that Alexander's mounted skirmishers went from javelineers to archers, and his prodromoi apparently from javelineers to lancers. And I guess it would simplify dealing with things like the Roman Army. Regarding mixins, if you can irreversibly upgrade them such that they also change in the buildings that produce them, and show also their "particular" name somewhere, maybe it could work, but those working on it would have a better understanding on why it wouldn't.

Besides my previous comments on why I think most of these rules could simply be removed, following that same line, I didn't comment on "entities you captured or converted from another player (or from Gaia) are not refunded", I wonder why this is the case: tons of monumental architecture has been dismantled by conquering states, using then the stone to build in their own style (even the Ayyubids tried to dismantle the Pyramids of Giza, Menkaure's has been left with a big gash since). That's what's great with stone and metal, quite reusable… which makes me think if wood should have some penalty, but also wouldn't want to add rules, my philosophy being the exact opposite.

@Thalatta happy it was not in my code

Oh hell naw! Just by pressing Learn to Play one can read "Civilisation", no one cares about guidelines . Will consider it for my upcoming renaming PR.

Just something to consider: I don't think there are any examples of ancient sword guards looking like a nihonto's tsuba.

Couldn't you do that through a "mixin"?

Here is an intermediate step recover-resources.mod V1.32. - not taking into account @Thalatta's latest comments yet, unfortunately. Version 1.3.2 · for 0 A.D. release 28 and the release 29 development builds When you delete one of your own structures, ships or siege engines, you get back a share of its resource cost, provided the situation allows it. What comes back is the salvage rat (30 % by default) multiplied by the object's health condition, meaning its remaining health. Food is never given back. Rules and Constraints: Only your own deliberate deletion (Delete key / delete button) triggers a refund. Nothing is refunded when an enemy destroys the entity. The refund is based on the entity's current cost, including cost modifiers from technologies and civilisation bonuses. Food is excluded: it was eaten during construction, while timber, stone and metal can be carried away. Entities you captured or converted from another player (or from Gaia) are not refunded. Ships are only refunded when deleted within 30 m of one of your own finished docks. Otherwise the message says how many ships gave nothing back. Siege engines are only refunded while they stand inside your own territory, e.g. a catapult abandoned deep in enemy land gives nothing back. The refund shrinks with condition: a ram at 40 % health gives back 40 % of the usual amount. Buildings (nw including walls and towers) must pass three rules: not attacked or captured in the last 15 seconds, no enemy capture progress and not decaying outside your borders, and one of your worker units within 20 m to do the work. Fields are never refunded. Nothing you delete dies at once. Buildings are dismantled and units disbanded over 10 seconds, losing health as they go, and any resources only arrive at the end (units don't give back resources). Pressing delete again calls it off and the drained health is given back; an enemy hit interrupts it the same way. Units take just as long even though they hand nothing back. Anything under threat is the exception: it falls the moment you press delete, because under fire there is no time for an orderly teardown. That means anything hit in the last 5 seconds, or with an armed enemy within 40 m — enemies closing in count even before the first blow lands. Whether it still pays out is decided by the ordinary rules, so a building under attack dies at once and gives nothing. Unfinished foundations are skipped because the base game already refunds the unbuilt part of their cost. Deletions the game itself blocks (for example, a building that is mostly captured) get no refund. A short message shows how much was recovered. recover-resources.zip README.md

Thanks; I'll bring more images and news soon.

A new realease of post-Atlas is available (see intial post of this threat). It covers these bugs: changed to the game's standard spelling (hopefully captured all issues) show natural food resources placed on the map in analyze tab/resources table make the finding table sortable allow re-reading the map after changing (re-analyze button) conversion process can be stopped. added support for nomad mode And these new features: Assess balance of resources amongst players (imbalance might be an intended challenge hence this is only an indicational warning) Added a way to edit map properties (analyze tab, edit button), so that it is possible to edit description, names, map characteristics, players etc. without re-opening Atlas. Please let me know your observations, criticism, found bugs, new ideas, improvement suggestions etc.!

I know. I'm currently working on too many other things to implement it myself, but if anyone does (preferably without an LLM) I would be happy to review and merge it. I suppose the main question is where and how big to display each of the names.

It's also not really made for a navy; you could fish or park a military vessel in the bits of water, but good trade over water not so much.

Then it's bad https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/wiki/EnglishStyleGuide

Phantastic! Beautiful! Awesome!

Exactly - had Claude analyse spelling through the game and maps and the verdict was rather US English, although not fully consistent throughout maps and modules. So most probably I continue in an inconsistent spelling (changed Analyse to Analyze and colour to color, but not yet civilisaiton to civilization). As this change took a lot of tokens, I'd park that for the moment.

I've desired this for a long time. A decade.

Hello everyone! I’m here to share some more news about my mod, World Rising! Over the past few days, I’ve had to spend quite a bit of time fixing several meshes from the 3D models I created, mainly to make sure the lighting works properly across all objects. There are still a few meshes that need some adjustments, and this work ended up changing my plans a little for the next few days. Since I’m developing the project on my own, I’m trying to follow an approach that I consider very important: create, test, and optimize at the same time. Instead of leaving all the problems to be fixed at the end, I prefer to make some progress, fix what needs to be fixed, study the results, and constantly evaluate what can be improved. One of my biggest priorities is making sure that World Rising remains lightweight, visually appealing, and runs smoothly, even with thousands of assets being rendered on the map in real time. Because of this, I’m reviewing models, meshes, textures, and other elements to find the best possible balance between visual quality and performance. It’s a huge challenge! Especially when working alone on a project of this scale, but we’re moving in the right direction, and little by little, World Rising is taking the shape I originally envisioned. For now, here are a few images from the development process. I’ll be sharing more news and updates soon! Feel free to comment, share your opinions, criticism, and suggestions, and take part in the development. Your feedback is always very welcome! And a special thanks to Stan, who pointed out the mesh issue and helped me notice an important problem that needed to be fixed. Thank you to everyone who continues to follow and support World Rising!

there's a red sea map, but oman is missing a chunk

Arma III Arma Reforger Holdfast : Nations at War Sim CIty 4 Deluxe edition ps : Holdfast is a wonderful game with a fantastic community ! And defending our empire against the perfidious Albion is a must.

Wouldn't it be better to use what the game uses? "Civilisation" appears in the UI, UK English then. Although I don't know how consistent this is.