All Activity

Going to put my own implementation opinion out there, always kinda found it weird how 0ad does it but I've gotten used to it somewhat. Though if we were to take a page out of say a simplified "realism" argument, my implementation for damage types would be: hack = blade edge slashing/hacking (if you'll forgive the lack of better words to describe it) aka mostly good against non-armoured foes. (there's just one unit with falxes iirc, for macedonians, they can be an exception by just giving them a bonus against armour) pierce = spears/javelins/bolts/arrows piercing targets, doesn't struggle against armour, just a good all around option crush = a solid mass hitting another, aka big rock from onager/siege ballista crushing someone, or a getting a mace/club hit to the face. Great at dealing with really heavily armoured targets. Slings could be included in this but that's a can of worms. This is just a little thought experiment I've had, honestly I prefer 0ad's current implementation of the damage mechanics. Thinking about a bit more deeply, the system I've written up has some problems when it come to classifying certain units, eg falxes for when thracian/dacians/getae get implemented, or how slingers work (sling bullets are technically speaking a crushing type of damage, but they are also known to pierce through targets given enough force). To balance armour around this system would be difficult me thinks, I personally would use an armour types system with: non armoured = basically basic clothes, no armour, little to no resistance to any damage types organic = aka leather/linen/whatever material that is not made from bronze/iron, good resistance to slashing, decent to slightly below average resistance to crushing, little to none against piercing metalic = iron or bronze, great resistance to slashing, average to poor restistance against piercing, low resistance to crush. Already I'm having problems describing this armour system because of what little I know about armour materials and the physics behind how they mitiagate certain types of damage makes this way too unimmersive/game-ified to me. Again, this was just a thought theory of an implementation, I still think that 0ad's current damage mechanics work very well for it (and imho, a way better representation than AoE2DE does).

I'll share the replay later, so I went ahead and 1v2ing my first match with 200 pop limit, they made the VH AI so hard I'm already in 1 hour, my army dying, wood is no longer, all my structure are destroyed leaving only fields and houses, they still spawning in champions... omg... bro I give up when my hero died. So a simple tip to possibly win this, poke the bees nest and run to the fortress.

Offender lobby's name : roothopper My lobby name : LeJardindEpicure roothopper stopped the game without resigning as i turned the tide and wrecked havoc upon its troops. (funny to see you on the other side@b1g1d3a) commands.txt metadata.json

We got undead Italic mercenaries before GTA VI.

the romans probably took it

x2

If there was a way where I could capture Civil Centre then the Civilians I spawn with are with their own building faction equivalent to C&C;TW then it would be quite fun, chaotic and a bit of unfair.

So I guess I'll have to wait for multithreaded support good luck to the devs, I love this project with my whole heart, truly nothing like it

Hi @seregadushka, It is very understandable that you feel that some features of the game in their current state, prevents you from appreciating the game fully. Repetitive tasks, aren't adding anything to the game-play experience. And it is part of the 0.A.D. vision to limit them as possible. "This interactive/real-time contest should challenge the mind and avoid boring repetitive actions." As such, units autonomously carry on after cutting a tree as one of the example you provided, but this is because we can be confident enough that the player would want this to happen. However, production is complex. It depends on a lot of factors, and influence of lot of other things too. For example, there are already problems often stemming from the current auto-queue : If the user need the resources for another purpose, auto-queue might unconviniently consume them Which building should produce if two of them are competing for the same limited resource? How can the actions that we will be carried be as best controllable by the player? Theses challenges, I did face them when trying to make the trainer feature in ModernGUI. Because I was new to programing, to UX design, and even to 0.A.D. the feature is built with a bit of things that I wish to revisit. Mainly, it adds waaaay too much buttons to the UI, and complex ones too. I have in mind a system that will permit to have the QOL gained by this trainer feature, but without the added complexity. Basically, make it feel like it is very naturally integrated. It might be something that will come sometime in ModernGUI, and that I will poll here on the forum for an integration in vanilla. My beliefs are also that we should enrich some other parts of the game-play such as formations, units abilities... Sort that the game become even more of a strategic contest and less then just a measure of 'mechanical skills'.

@seregadushka This queue locking feature that you suggest exist in some mods, called Autoqueue or ProGUI or something. You can ask @Atrik for help on this

Another bug in R28. Elite Actor missing head.

As I threatened here I created a small mod to test some balance changes. Attempt at a git repository: https://codeberg.org/DesertRose/0ad-balance-mod So far it only affect Citizen soldiers that deal Hack and / or Pierce damage. Short Changelog: - (Cavalry) Swordsmen became better against Spearmen, Pikemen and ranged units - (Cavalry) Javelineer became better against melee cavalry, worse against ranged infantry Full Changelog: 0ad-balance-mod.zip

Hi guys and girls !!! My name is coming from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boston_Legal_characters#Alan_Shore I'm writting you from Belgium (near Brussels). Sorry for my english. I'm 71 years old. Benear dead, but that's not really a problem. I had my time I'm playing 0 A.D. about 2 years now, and i love it. I thing that my level is middle. Better than easy. I love also to converse with AI. Voilà, you know me now. My born language is french. So long, perhaps on the network, if I understand how it works.

This can be a good middle ground.

Please don't show me how I should feel during the game. If you give me your explanations, I won't stop considering it a bug. I can cite analogies from the game itself, showing that these things are of the same order. According to this logic, a unit should stop when it has cut down 1 tree. The camel should stop after 1 cycle. But it is the birth of new fighters that is highlighted in a different behavior. For me, it's exactly the same when the creation of units continues with the availability of resources. This is not logical, and does not coincide with the general strategy of the mechanics of the game. And don't tell me, "To make it interesting for you, we're making the game harder. Clicking on the barracks 100 times per game is not a game, but a battle with the UI. This is an artificially created problem. My conclusion is that the "queue" button should be pressed only by the user, and raised only by the user. Do this in the general settings: "Queue Locking. And let everyone choose the game mode for themselves, whether they want to take a break from the game or face 2 hours of battle with a wrong decision .

What's annoying that if auto-production stops due to insufficient resources the building switches back to no auto-production. It would be nice if the game remembers auto-production, and if I order a building to produce units again I do not have to enable auto-production again.

yes,and I like it as well. gng, do NOT remove this

Seconded. Otherwise, why even play the game if you want everything to be automated for you?

As can be seen, they can build a Palace and Pillar of Ashoka is grayed out. I've constructed a Palace, but it can only research Spes.

Hey, this is intended, so that there remains some attention needed to maintain your economy. Furthermore, putting more actions into maintaining your economy should reward you with a better economy. it may be still be changed, of course. If one considers this a bug, my preference would be is to remove it from the game.

Dev Repo has moved on to R29, which has some incompatibilities with R28 (minimap/type element in templates, for example).

Yes, and I like it.

I'm not at home for the weekend (father in law 70s birthday ) Let's do another testrun during the week

I think stopping the birth of new units due to lack of resources is a big mistake by the developers. According to this strategy, the game turns into a punishment. I have to constantly check the condition of the barracks. The unit production queue should be restored automatically when resources become available. My mouse will break before I enjoy the game. This is incorrect. This can be considered a bug.

I am Iberians in this match. I've captured Maury CCs and they are training Indian Laborers. Screenshot attached.