All Activity

Hey, I don't know how realistic would you like Ancient Greek towers to be, or how many variants could be done, but here I described how they were according to their function: And here a couple of images from the book I mentioned: Basically, if the upper chamber had catapults, the roof was gabled, and the slits wider, with double-leafed outward-opening side-swinging shutters attached to the outside. Otherwise, if it also had archers, then it had an open fighting platform protected by a parapet at roof level, similar to the right tower of the lower picture. Cilindrical versions were harder to build but more resistant.

New variant:

Update: Added dirtier version of houses, storehouse, sentry, defense and forge: House: Storehouse: Forge: Sentry and Defense:

Yes. The Roman Onager can loose multiple rocks for a wide area effect. This tech can let Sasanian archers shoot 5 arrows at a time. Ships can volley several projectiles at once. Is there an Issue or Pull Request for it?

I feel like we were able to do this with CWA back when it was historical. We got Ele archers to shoot 3 arrows, one for each archer... but doesnt seem to work anymore. We had to turn them into "building" AI so they were unable to capture, and then it was when there was random fire and not focus fire.

That is probably beyond my time/abilities but I know it has been discussed. I think it would be a great opportunity to enrich gameplay (multi-projectile siege, unique units, ships perhaps).

EDIT: Fixed. It was these lines: range/ and stable/ were missing after I moved those techs to these respective folders.

Parthian tactics is un-researchable even after researching Archery Tradition and Advanced Cavalry for Xiongnu and Scythians.

Choose the 'Removed' option in the player placement dropdown. Maybe not Illyrians, but we have several more in mind. Some of them are quite mature already in mods and can be ported over to base game in the future. For variety, Scythians and Xiongnu seem like logical candidates.

Extended to wherever it makes sense would save headaches. Regarding tribal confederations, it would be nice if the choice tree corresponds to probable historical alliances, usually driven by geographical proximity or customs, resulting in a less heterogeneous and more specialised confederation.

Roman legions drive back German tribes from their lands? Or, are they occupying their lands? Nevermind, doesn't matter. Rome_VS_Germ.zip

Click on the "Barter" icon on the top right. Play "Best for MP" Random map types with Anatolian/Fall/Temperate biomes. Those biomes usually have enough wood. I do agree that the early game is heavily dependent on wood.

Yep, I agree. We can cross that road when we get to it. Imagine AOMR's minor god choice mechanic, but with Germanics choosing the tribes to add to their confederation in each subsequent phase. This could be specific to the Germanics or we can extend it to any civ where it makes sense.

I recommend choosing map type: random for better gameplay outcomes. Within random map category you can find "best for MP" maps which have resources set up according to game design and not purely for map beauty. An additional benefit of random maps is that you can have any number of players you like and any map size that you like.

So, when talking about Germans, the idea seems to be to control a coalition, and one chooses which tribes join it, unlocking different units, buildings, techs, heroes, whatever. I like this, since it would save a lot of headaches regarding what tribes to ignore from them, not to end with lots of civs that look similar (same with Britons and Iberians). I would add that maybe for these factions the “starting tribe” could be selected beforehand (or as a free pop-up choice at the very beginning), not to start with some unspecified tribe. If one in particular is needed for some campaign, this initial selection would be locked, and their name set accordingly (if that’s possible). Regarding the Greeks, it seems a bit more problematic because they are quite fleshed out already (since we know way more details about them), whole leagues would be too heterogeneous. If the problem to solve is that certain scenarios need to consider city-states that are not included in the game, then there could be a generic Greek template for them (I guess the original one is still around). Maybe a bit unrelated but somehow connected on how to prepare certain things for the future: some time ago I’ve read about the “Grand Vision” (adding lots of epochs and factions to the game), which has the issue of how to deal with factions that didn’t exist in certain epochs. Some have mentioned they don’t want to have civilizations separated into eras, others that don’t want Mycenaean Greece vs Byzantine Late Empire. I think a solution is to have a faction epoch graph that would make factions available if they had come into existence by the starting epoch chosen. It doesn’t make sense to start at 400 B.C. with the Seleucids, one would have to choose the Macedonians (or maybe the Persians, that’s why it’s not a tree but a directed acyclic graph), and at the appropriate epoch, given the choice to stay Macedonian or switch to Seleucids or Ptolemies. If Macedonians are chosen, later on there’s the Roman conquest, so one would need to switch to them. If alternative history could be an option, one could choose to stay Macedonian (this doesn’t mean everything goes, Ptolemies in 400 B.C. is not alternative history, but nonsense), but then one would need to make up the characteristics of this faction from a parallel universe. Anyway, although the switch could be done between scenarios, doing it in the middle of a scenario would show that the game can handle these historical changes seamlessly with a gameplay feature. This could be a solution regarding what I mentioned in https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/143241-thoughts-on-the-spartans/?do=findComment&comment=750127 about trying to be historically accurate with techs: "Persians and Seleucids would have almost completely different techs, since one completely preceded the other chronologically".

Can you send me a copy of that script? That’ll be useful for me.

Thank you so much! I’ve been trying to figure out what was breaking it, I’ll fix it for version 0.13.

a

thanks to you we have celtic coalition buildings in CWA and if you give us some more ideas (Ill ready your post) we could include more!

Brave browser has an option to continue playing after locking the phone. Same for Firefox.

I didnt know about this. Thanks! Well, there's no accounting for taste.

I proposed something similar with coalitions: Personnally I would prefer something enabling the possibility to have unique units, techs and buildings through the tribes chosen. Coalitions are how historically the "barbarians" and the small nations were able to defeat massive empires.

What you are asking can't be reasonably done. It's not about doing a statistically validated poll, but what one reads (I can read plenty in three months), and perceives when taking up the game (maybe this was too long ago for you and many), after all, this thread started with "several posts that suggest that the current Petra is too difficult". That’s a start for something, and everything else I keep reading here, on Reddit, etc, makes it valid for me, considering the gap between Very Easy and Sandbox has already been mentioned before. And it's not that I don't care that some are having a positive experience, it's that that doesn't indicate there's no problem for some. Regarding pacing, as I've mentioned, it's a fact that production times are much faster than in other games, as discussed in the link I provided from this forum. Regarding speed of the game itself, I see that as less relevant than the other two things, but I do still think all this is mostly cosmetic, since once you choose the Competitive Preset, it just stays there, and one would use that for everything. Why do experienced players care what the default setting was at the beginning, if it's clear what the accepted competitive setting is? There’s no breaking of what already works, it’s all under the corresponding Preset. Actually, besides cosmetics, I also proposed the addition of levels, which was also mentioned by the OP. To summarise, I think the difficulty levels should be (for Aggressive, while for Balanced and Defensive rushes should be tuned down even more) something along these lines (or whatever approximation possible): -Sandbox: as it is now. -Extremely Easy: no rushes, small armies and defenses. -Very Easy: small rushes, medium armies and defenses. -Easy: medium rushes, decent armies and defenses. -Normal: decent rushes, large armies and defenses, comparable to other games, no warning should be needed. -Hard, Very Hard and Extremely Hard: only now large rushes, huge armies and defenses, EH at least as hard as SC2 brutal (or whatever is possible), VH and H more or less equidistantly filling the gap down to Normal. For hard levels, yes, for easy levels, no. It's like all difficulty levels seem clustered somewhere above the usual Normal, but don't reach as far as SC2 Brutal, which is not that brutal considering I'm far from being a pro, yet managed just fine.

The inevitable conclusion it isn't that AI isn't hard at all. It's actually rather too easy, but the vanilla content 0AD offers isn't optimal for casual or new players for leisure games, nor for learning. There are some work in this area already like : https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8861 https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/7785 Also a good foundation for making campaigns more immersive: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8614 We can thanks @Vantha which is the main dive in these areas. I recommend trying mods, such as Delenda-Est, hyrule-conquest and a tone more already ported and coming up for R28, that are just 2 clicks away for players to get a great load of content from. If you want to not be a multiplayer try-harder, you do have many options that doesn't involve trying to beat the hardest level of AI possible actually.

When the playback stops because I closed Youtube / my browser I can just go to my phone's media overview (swipe down) and click play. The video now plays in the background / when my phone is locked. Or I use an app like PipePipe. Why would you even want that? That sounds horrible both from a usability aspect (tiny video on an already tiny screen) and for your brain (nuke your already shrinking attention span).