All Activity

I don’t mean to suggest that your observations aren’t a valid concern, I’ve also experienced connectivity issues after switching ISPs, and I’ve felt some frustration. I’m not the right person to give a definitive answer. However, my limited understanding of the topic leads me to think that moving from a P2P system to a server-based one is not as trivial as it might seem. I hope I'm wrong about this

For ELO to work near to correctly, you need matchmaking system. Otherwise, as guerringuerrin said, this is small community - you will find out your relative skill level by playing with others. Btw, i'd not use ELO numbers, rather Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3, etc. Or Level 1,2,3....

P.S. i wanted to try new release and play Rated to update my MMR a bit, but this really bothered me I kinda lost will to find hack to play. Also lag/performance... Really essential things imo.

what's cost? How OpenRA has tens of servers (they don't do peer-to-peer but every game goes via server afaik)? I mean we don't have thousands of players, these days processing power shouldn't be expensive, is it? And isn't this main priority? If guys already invested thousands of hours in developing this great game, shouldn't it be finished to work properly? God knows how many players are annoyed by this... I mean, IK it's open source but... there must be a way

My 2 cents: Ratings is not that accurate as it seems until you get 2000 with 1000+ games

Some Rome vs Rome civil wars It was tough for a while, if the AI managed to get its army together before attacking, it would've won on that first push. Grouping logic needs to be re-implemented. RomeVsRome_M.zip

@BeTe The main difference is that StarCraft relies on Battle.net servers to help players connect and, if needed, even relay the connection, so you usually don’t have to configure anything yourself. In contrast, 0ad uses direct peer to peer connections between players, which means it depends much more on each person’s network setup, router, and ISP. That’s why StarCraft tends to “just work,” while 0ad can require extra configuration in some cases. Now, one might think “why not just build something similar and add a server to handle this” It sounds simple, but in practice it’s quite costly, both in terms of development time to implement it properly and the ongoing resources needed to keep it running reliably over time.

My humble-noob advice is: start playing 1v1s and 1400+ TGs. People will start rating you, and you’ll be in shape sooner than you think

Thanks man, I know for that - did it long ago but never worked consistently. But I don't think players should be expected to bother with router configuration. Can't this be solved by default? How Starcraft 1 works for me?

@Emacz that's great and much appreciated, of course! My point was that if @Perzival12 has some good ideas it might be useful to test them individually in a small mod (possibly even limited to only 2 or 3 civs at the beginning) to acquire a feeling for the suggested changes. Alternatively it might be useful to join forces and work on the same mod?

Just trying to get a real sense of my level for future tournaments, because honestly I don’t really know my rating and I’d rather not make one up

Updated Republican Romans hero roster^ New addition: Gracchi Brothers.

Bruh

Obviously, but the truth is that...

It happens, when too long without playing, can get rusty. (I have seen it even in top players)

@wowgetoffyourcellphone

Thanks for the joke, it made me realize the calculation should weigh differently each skill mentioned by @guerringuerrin and @Perzival12, since some are considered more critical than others by the team

That only happens with Romans in the campaigns. It's fine in the Matches which only requires 10 buildings.

Thanks for the reply. I'm using Delenda Est and chose Random/Romans. As you can see, it asks for Temple Vesta to advance to the Town Phase. Even stranger, there isn't a Temple Vesta to be had in the menu, only a Temple of Mars. No worries, I don't have to use Romans.

We have added more diversity and complexity in our version of an "Expansion" Classical Warfare AEA! That's one of the reasons the project was started. @Grautvornix I wasnt able to edit and add in your quote as well But there is already a mod (plenty actually) out there that add variety and complexity.

A curiosity of this discussion is that all of the above traits for each civ are already addressed by bonuses/techs/heros ect in game. Surely there are others where mechanics can be adjusted or added. I think its important to distinguish between real gameplay uniqueness and perceived uniqueness. Example of real uniqueness: skirm cavalry for carthage has extra move speed, while skirm cavalry for iberians has reduced cost. The base unit is the same but the bonuses applied to it are not equal or similar. 0ad does a good job of not chasing cosmetic uniqueness. I look at aoe4 as an example for cosmetic uniqueness. At a surface level all the civs have dramatically different units, building types, bonuses, and even unique economic units. This creates a problem where there are almost no basic units in play, and no basic civ setup. As a result everything for every civ is unique, and so the uniqueness loses its value as the respective bonuses and unit strengths must be co-equal. When civilization balance is taken into account in aoe4 every civ must have a "unique" way of doing the same thing, for example every civ in aoe4 has some way of generating indefinite gold through various "unique" implementations. There is more diversity of strategy per civ for 53 civs in aoe2 than there is for 10 or so civs in aoe4. In 0ad and aoe2, the civs are asymmetrically balanced such that a civ's strongsuit can not be exactly matched by another civ and in order to accomplish this there must be a baseline roster and build order that civilizations share.

@Emma are you still interested in this? Let me know if you need help! Otherwise I can finish it for you, I'd just need you to sign the legal waiver so I could use your work

I red all this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_map_projections to find the best projection. Some considerations that bring me to chose sinusoidal: Sinusoidal is an equal-area as well as Lambert projection. Lambert is perfect till the first 45°, then is awful: to preserve areas it changes some states too much, like Australia. I start from Tangarm heighmapper. I searched a lot for alternatives with other projection, but there aren't. Tangram uses Mercator without geo-reference or GeoTiff, so I have only a png, and I changed it to a pseudo-sinusoidal manually. In the future I can use a real sinusoidal through a python script to automize the reprojection and apply what I learned in these two years (color curves in GIMP, ...), but for now I'll not recreate it. It's a too long work.

I’ve never played AoE, so I wouldn’t know…

They are much more unique now than they used to be, the exception being maybe in A23 and before. Some civilization have more unit variety, others have stronger upgrades for fewer units. Analogies being Kushites for the variety and Spartans for stronger, but fewer unit types. Balance is a hard thing to master, so this game tries to offload uniqueness onto civ-specific upgrades and bonuses. If you think civilizations are mostly the same in 0 A.D., then you must believe that civilizations in AoE2 are almost identical.