All Activity

New for R28 Civs: Galatians A mix between Britons, Gauls, and Germans. The only Celtic civ with Resource Wagons. Cimbri Similar to the base game's version of the civ, but with standard DE features. Heroes Several more heroes of various civs rounded out and given their features (auras, etc.). This is an ongoing process, which is mostly complete, but there is still work to do. Hope to complete for r29. Visual: New and Updated technology, unit, and structure portraits. This is an ongoing process, incomplete for r28, but quite far along. The mod uses AI to create new images, utilizing in-game screenshots as base reference for most portraits, with historical research and references to round out the process. This disclaimer is for full transparency. Sample of Unit portraits: Sample of Technology portraits: Sample Structure portraits: The mod includes 8 new main menu backgrounds as well. Sample: This is all in addition to the other DE civs, like Scythians, Xiongnu, Yamatai (Yayoi), Epirotes, and Imperial Romans. A year and a half of tweaks, changes, and improvements to every aspect of the mod.

I don't see it as a mistake from @Emacz if ever the reason was even because of something he did. The folder name, or anything of the path, as long as it's supported by the game and doesn't change any of the content, should be interpreted the same for compatibility. It's not even uncommon that when I use his mod and work on it, I make raw copies of the folder instead of using git functionalities. In that case, I'm likely to end up with a renamed folder name. You get the point, if it's useless (I think it is but maybe there is actually a valid reason) why make life of modders harder? ( @Emacz also being expert at being excessively bothered by this kind of stuff) Maybe I even pointed this out myself but i would never say that would make the feature "sterile". I'm not interested in waging a war against a made up threat that even if it existed, would be guaranteed to not care too much about measure taken against it. I understand you disagree but you see my point. If it's also at the cost of UX of normal players, then maybe we should also reconsider priorities. The above reasoning is also agnostic of your opinion on any existing mod, as it's just about intent to not disclose a modification.

@DesertRose, they have better base gather rates for their workers, which makes them faster. Maybe they also amass larger armies, but I'm not sure if that is true with this release. Medium AI is the only "fair" difficulty where the AI gets no resource advantages or disadvantages. Otherwise, it's not smarter.

Nah, I just did what @real_tabasco_sauce said above, I added a damage type called True, and nothing has resistance to it.

My reply was only meant as an example in response to your question. I didn’t mean to imply that the goals of a mod like this could lead to cheating. Perhaps it was a poor example. I only wanted to suggest that this kind of change could potentially introduce compatibility issues. But as I clarified immediately after, I don’t have the knowledge to categorically say whether it would or wouldn’t prevent that. Rather, my impression was that this change seems designed mainly to spare modders from a small inconvenience that, in my opinion, they should probably handle themselves. Afterall they should kinda know what they are doing or keep learning and improving their product. We’re not talking about anything very complex here. Just learning how to properly create a .zip and distribute it correctly. You yourself mentioned that this was something like: Of course I see mitigating the risk of cheating as a good thing. But it’s not my intention to revive any unproductive debate around that topic here. Those weren't my motivations when I ask about this mod. Yes. I still think that would be a good thing to do. Even if I remember someone arguing that this might be a sterile solution, since hiding a mod can be as simple as renaming one or two files. Anyways, I think we’ve interacted enough over the years for you to know that I’m not against mods or modders.

You've very well summarized my thoughts on the matter.

@Atrik helped me so it should be easier for the mod to work. I'm definitely looking for people who want to test it out. One of the biggest things I think we've done so far (besides add more units) is increase resource gathering thus hopefully allowing for more early attacks/skirmishes and strats. women gather rates 1.0 .75 3.0 .5 .25 .25 (Now only cost 40 food, 40 health) Gender rather rates 1.0 .5 3.0 .8 .43 .43 (50 food 50 health) CS gather rates .75 .25 3.0 .75 .4 .4 and then Serfs.... I think the game misrepresents the role of slingers in Classical Antiquity. Talking to some of the historians who have helped on the game, a lot of the civs didnt have slingers per say.... they were more like low class citizens who were the laborers, but sometimes would need to skrimish throwing rocks or other small objects at the invaders. So the civs that have women only all have a serf unit. For slingers its 50% less dmg, 25% less range but only cost 40F 10S and 10W their gather rates are: .75 .25 3.45 .86 .46 .46 (Berries, farms, meat, wood, stone, metal)

Did you need a readme for when you first start playing 0ad? The whole point now is to not "sell" it as a mod, but as a completely different game. But I was working on updating all the changes, and will continue to do so as i fix things up.

it will take me atleast a whole day just going through all the changes you made. you should make a readme or smth on your github to graphically show the changes maybe... your mod is really fun tho. P.S: you don't preach your mod when I ask for it but you do when I don't smh does everyone hate me or smth

New anthem?

Does Hard and Very Hard AI only have more resources, or do they actually act smarter, too?

Perverting compatibility check into a political tool has been discussed for a while from the time I was here in 0AD. Yesterday, while searching the git to see if I could make a useful contribution with this path thing, I found something very cringe on git on this topic. I don't know if it's something that's worth discussing at this point. Maybe we should just let people fulfilling the urge to do something about "cheating", even if I'm unsure if theses people ever log in to the lobby. Sorry if any reader find this offensive because they did believe in the initiative but it's just very very poorly though out, by people actually smart. A while ago, we also discussed with you @guerringuerrin and @Norse_Harold that we should be able to see all player mods from the gamesetup room. This would be a good nice to have feature to add. It will help mitigate a lot of issues with mods, like the one with feldmap versions you are giving as example above. Most importantly, it doesn't engage a war against mods and modders pretexting they could be malicious, therefore nuking the UX for everybody is totally justified.

If someone can tell me how to

I know that some multiplayer platforms and games implement file integrity checks to prevent malicious code or cheats disguised as mods. I’m not saying that would necessarily solve anything here (we know how easy it is to hide mods in 0 A.D.), but I also don’t have enough knowledge to take a strong position on it. I was mostly wondering whether removing it could introduce other problems. Your explanation helps clarify the situation. My original comment was more about the idea that this feels like a solution that lets modders skip some basic precautions, rather than addressing a real engine issue. I understand that this can be somewhat subjective. I see. The point I was trying to illustrate is that, regardless of where the mod is downloaded from, its correct functioning depends on it being distributed properly: the same file structure across all download sources, and the correct download link in the case of git. Not through Code -> Download ZIP, but by creating a release that appears on the right side of the repository page. Also, if I remember correctly, this caused issues with Feldmap in the past when different versions were used, resulting in OOS. Not trying to make a big issue out of this. Thanks for the explanation!

And for completeness sake here is the announcement post the banner links to (for everybody who stumbles over this thread after the banner is gone):

I was the one who improved the AI's eco and the army size hehe I hope it's not too hard for new players

Thank you, it worked!

There is always a solution to still make it work, despite the path checking. But good UX is generally about making things simple, resilient (can adapt to a variety of users with a variety of technical level), and not add unnecessary complexity. Why do you think we should keep the path checking? What is it useful for? Note that in the examples I give, I pretend like files after the folder where is the mod.json matters but actually it doesn't, yet anyways.. Community mod was downloaded probably exclusively on mod.io I think. As for Feldmap, it is marked "compatible" for convenience although it's obviously technically incompatible. Can't agree more.

Hello, as mentionned in the banner on these forums, you need to reenable TLS in the game options in order to join the lobby

I have played normally just yesterday. Today i was trying to login into my account but instead of logging in i got this error: Error (The authentication mechanisms the server offered are not supported or no authentication mechanisms were available). My friend joins normally.

Ye I notice how the VH AI is keeping up with unit production, usually once they send their army, their economy is crippled. Now they have some leftover to rebuild their economy. I'm not sure if I can ever beat 4VH as Han now. - First replay(1), I'm always double the AI in terms of score so notice how it scored 1.5k higher the usual, this was probably my 4th gameplay. - So I've learn a lot from multiplayer so my gameplay has improved in 2nd replay(2) and maybe its my game setting(200 max pop) or something but I'm surprised the AI had only 1 Civil Centre... usually it would be 3 or 4 by now.. Actually thats an old replay, I think I deleted the 200 pop replay, oh well, its just the usual setting. - Third game... Its actually keeping up with me lol. commands(2).txt commands(1).txt commands(Just look at the score).txt

Ok, I understand your point. I have a few questions though: From what I understand, in your first example the issue would only exist on the modder’s machine, since end users would all receive the same file structure. Is that correct? If so, this seems like the most justifiable case for not checking file integrity, since it only affects a development environment and not distributed copies of the mod. Seems very similar to the previous one. A user cloning the repository would obtain what is essentially the “final” structure of the mod that would later be distributed, right? I see your point about downloading the repository as a zip from git, which adds the -branch suffix to the directory name. But couldn’t that be avoided by creating a release? That would appear on the right side of the repository page and users could download the packaged version directly. This case also seems similar to the first one to me. Users downloading the mod from mod.io would all receive the same package, and therefore the same file structure. Am I right? It’s true that I haven’t worked on incompatible mods (I only contributed something very small to the community-mod, the changelog). However, we’ve been using Feldmap for years and this has never been a problem in practice, largely for the reasons above: users end up downloading the same file structure. The only exception I can think of is when someone downloads the source code directly from the repository (using the “Code → Download ZIP” button). But I always assumed that option exists mainly for people who want to develop or inspect the code, not for end users who just want to install the mod. For that purpose, isn’t the release mechanism intended? In my humble opinion, an end user shouldn’t have to deal with technical issues that are inherent to development workflows. It seems more reasonable for the modder to be responsible for distributing a consistent packaged version of the mod.

Please share your replays against the AI here. Here's a couple from me. AI difficulty is Medium, but it feels more difficult to beat than even Hard AI from A27. As usual, there's a lot of floating resources around CarthageVSPersia_M.zip RomeVS_Sparta_M.zip

I've done a mod that change 0AD icon and I'm trying to distribute it. On my machine ModImWorkingOn/ ├─ mod.json ├─ fileIgnoredByGitIgnore.@#$% └─ art/ └─ 0ADIcon A user cloning my git New0ADIcon/ ├─ mod.json └─ art/ └─ 0ADIcon A user downloading from my git New0ADIcon-master/ ├─ mod.json └─ art/ └─ 0ADIcon A user downloading from mod.io New0ADIcon/ ├─ mod.json └─ New0ADIcon.zip Yes, 1000x harder for the modder to fck up and generate false positive then generating false negative thoughts. Being on the responsibility of the modder rather then the user is also obviously desirable. I think that also invalidate your remarks about this being a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. Which you would have a high chance of being wrong about since I don't think you ever use incompatible mods (yes you use and distribute compatible ones but they don't have this problem. For now, anyways). I don't know the original cause of the problem I faced with @Emacz, and others using his mod. But this isn't the first time I'm facing troubles with mods trying to use compatibility check, and this fix would have probably solved past cases.

You could attach a README to your repository providing instructions, and (even better) create a release in your repository with the properly packaged .zip/.pyromod. That would make things much easier for both you and the users of your mod in the long run.