All Activity

I managed to solve this problem, without restarting. Steps: 1. Uninstall game completely, delete all 0ad config, cache, log and replays. 2. Re-install game but in a different location. I did it to my C:\ 3. Instead of using the start menu, go into where you installed 0ad and click on pyrogenesis.exe to launch the game. Now the graphics are fine. Installing to the same location will persist the problem (reason is beyond me) Not deleting configs, and most importantly cache, will persist the problem (probably broken render artifacts are in there) Starting menu on windows sometimes randomly fails to run the correct .exe file (reason is also beyond me)

Thanks! I confirm this also happens on A27. I have opened #8205. We've had a similar known issue with Petra for a few versions now. Thanks for the report. Unfortunately I don't see anything strange with the commands.txt, I can replay the game with correct hashes by installing feldmap from mod.io. I get no serialization errors. However I can't tell you whether mods such as "CustomTrainer" can cause such errors. I have taken a look at the crashdump and I can't get a meaningful stack trace from it. I see in the crashlog something about "insufficient access rights to open file" but that might just be the error reporter saturated after you "continued" from previous errors. Let us know if you encounter this issue again. I'd like to launch this tomorrow. @Outis @little Guest can you confirm the Windows 7 issue is actually fixed with a clean install of RC3?

GPU skinning requires restart IIRC. And that's definitely the symptoms for it.

Sorry, I just forgot to share this very revealing conversation I had with a relatively new player. It's interesting how confusing it can be to think that a feature only helps you against better players, but doesn’t still give you an advantage against players at your own level. Can't blame him, I guess, in the end, we all fool ourselves a little.

I have installed and re-installed both release candidates RC1 and RC3. It happens on both versions. Regarding graphics driver, I installed AMD Radeon driver for my specific card from the AMD website. Maybe I misconfigured something... This problem only occurred on Windows and I was able to see perfect graphics with Linux on the exact same hardware and in-game settings. No. The funny thing persists, although in a slightly different form: Some additional observations: All buildings are rendered correctly, but any organic unit is completely messed up Unit skin look darker than they should be All GUI elements work perfectly fine

Ok i might be wrong about that. Still autociv, ModernGUI and BoxTargeting are not just GUI mods, the do more than just modifes the GUI or track/format data. anyways. all have been said

The Kushite priest is able to patrol as well !

Your user.cfg has not set gpuskinning. The default value is true. When I activate it I get nightmare fuel as well. I use arch on my laptop with AMD Ryzen 7 5700U and a AMD gpu. Does it help to set it off? headless.mp4

Autociv, Moderngui (as Boongui did), mod the simulation folder to track/format datas. Besides, BoxTargeting for example would edit few lines in input.js which whom is in gui/. Moding simulation folder doesn't do what you make it look like it does here. And popular GUI mods do modify it.

Seems that the patrol icon applies to cavalry. See lower right icon. I missed recognizing this distinction. My daughter pointed out that the patrol icon shows-up for ships. Will have to check it out the next time I play.

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. While its obvious to us that certain players use progui, the forum discussions are started by a vocal few who are aware of them and grasp the size of the advantage. Its easy to point to me or chrstgtr or reza and make the claim that "everyone knows and everyone accepts my cheating", but that is not the reality in multiplayer. Getting away with it in a team game does not mean that everyone there gave you consent to cheat, quite the opposite.

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?