All Activity

I spent some time trying to duplicate the issue after removing the personal store certs by backing them up and re-adding them later, but no dice. I only had one that had a key and tried removing/adding with/without the key, no change. Perhaps Ayyad1231 still has this issue. If I have the problem again, I'll investigate further.

Sheeps are in "passive" stance, while gazelles and all fleeing fauna have "skittish" stance.

But can this be deactivated? Or does the original species targeted have a priority? It's much harder to hunt gazelles than butcher sheep. Besides, I guess it shouldn't be "same stance", but "more passive stances than", because I'd think @Vrayer wanted to hunt passive animals as well after targeting an aggressive one (unless the point is to exterminate the aggressive ones first, which could be useful). To use the Target Area idea also for hunting (and the other things mentioned) would seem a less problematic and more encompassing solution to me.

Should be in for next release where (mostly useful for corrals) gathering from animals continue if other animals of the same stance are nearby. https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/9083

As we know thanks to the debugging work of @Shad_ and others that the problem seems to be related to client certificates, I dug into it a bit deeper. While I have no Windows available, I couldn't figure out the root cause, but I'm confident I found a workaround to get rid of the problem server-side without players having to do anything. As I mentioned, it isn't possible to disable requesting client certificates in ejabberd right now. After a discussion with the ejabberd devs (https://github.com/processone/ejabberd/discussions/4593), this will be added to the next version of ejabberd though (https://github.com/processone/ejabberd/commit/5b03ca51e003bae785d186f183c0cd276fc89e97), so once we update to that version at some point in the future, we should be fine. Until then, the workaround I have is to instruct the clients to only send us certificates signed by a specific CA. That CA is a dummy CA we have created and where clients haven't signed certificates from, which should result in clients not sending certificates at all. I have prepared all changes necessary for that (https://github.com/0ad/lobby-infrastructure/pull/43) and will likely deploy them in the upcoming days. It would be awesome if we'd have somebody who is currently affected by this problem or can reproduce it, so we can test if the changes indeed fix it.

When I'm concise, I'm misinterpreted, so I have to end writing more… The last couple of ideas were just alternatives for if people prefer them. Personally, I think I prefer the Target Area idea, which is what is described in your link, but only for fighting. My proposal generalises that idea to resource gathering (including hunting), garrisoning, boarding, and even repair, along whatever I can't think of right now.

You post so many ideas that I'm getting the reflex to skip your posts, just so you know you might want to be more concise. What you are describing here will be implemented next release : https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8525

There's an Issue for that on itea: #4581 (current title: Flags for all garrisonable buildings and units).

Funnily this was a topic on Reddit 16 days before OP as well:

A couple of different possibilities inspired by that, which might need refinement to condense on one useful thing: -Target types: if one queues this with a sheep and a gazelle, the hunter would hunt all sheep and gazelles he has around. This could be also used for chopping all trees, garrisoning certain buildings, and boarding certain ships, as long as they are nearby. In case of troops, maybe it could work as cavalry targeting archers, while pikemen cavalry, and so on. -Action stances: similar as before, but the target doesn't really need to be specified. One could hunt all non-aggressive animals (or also aggressive ones if that was selected) as mentioned, but could also work with things like "repair all", "board all", etc, as long as they are nearby.

@Vrayer, congratulation on making your first mod! I have to warn you however that changes like theses will cause oos if you play with players that wouldn't have the mod. For the mod you posted, you should keep the compatibility check enabled in the mod.json to avoid problems. If you really want to create a compatible mod that does this without compatibility issues (that will not oos), you would need a different approach where the UnitAI behavior stay unmodified but triggers re-issuing a command, for other clients to serialize the same behavior as you want. That's tiny slightly more complicated to do but very feasible.

My point being that, ideally, these should be historically informed. But I wonder why this is even the case, it seems quite independent from the objective of making a bot better than Petra, which seems you have achieved and I would be interested in playing against (and I think should make it to vanilla), just I wouldn't want additional inaccurate techs (if that's the case with those, and when there seems so much to clean up already). That's nice, although I guess it might be preferable if resource gathering speed is the same at all levels, and easier levels are easier for other reasons, to add uniformity and be easier to explain (by completely removing that "cheating" factor many don't like). Restrictions on the number of certain things seems fine to me, closer to modelling an actual player.

But the hunter has to be at the last of the previous species already, by "would then continue with the species of the queued individual animal", I would understand the species of each queued individual animal, that is, if you queue a sheep, a goat, and a gazelle, the hunter would hunt all sheep, goats and gazelles nearby, which is not what happens, and is what @Vrayer seems to want from his first post (what you say is the present behaviour, and he wouldn't be posting anything to begin with), and I understand his concern, but it's some micro that apparently has not really bothered players much. I've come across this kind of issue in the past when, for example, a few trees in a patch remain, and I'd like that, when workers are finished, for them to go mining, but if I try to queue this I have to click on each tree, otherwise they'll go mining after finishing the individual tree they are chopping right then. If others are up to reduce micro in this case, the "Target Area" button I mentioned could be considered, also including the possibility of targeting resources in that area. It would be just like expanding the pointer to an adjustable circular area for gathering, hunting, combat, and maybe other things like multiple garrisoning and ship boarding, for which units could automatically redistribute properly (right now I guess one would just queue orders and units would iterate among those until finding a spot).

Hey, thanks to @Atrik for pointing me in the right direction. I spent some time with ChatGPT and managed to create a small mod that seems to work. If you want to try it out: Installation: Download and extract the zip file into: Linux: ~/.local/share/0ad/mods/ Windows: %appdata%\0ad\mods\ Launch 0 A.D., go to Settings → Mod Selection, and enable Better Hunting. Restart 0 A.D. if required. What it does: Hunters can switch automatically between different meat animals. Other resource gathering behavior remains unchanged. better_hunting.zip

1. Technologies that increase resistance, etc. 2. Gathering speed multipliers (up to the Medium level, the player has certain bonuses; at Medium and above, resource gathering speed is the same) Sandbox=0.42, Very Easy=0.56, Easy=0.75, Medium=1.00, Hard=1.00, Very Hard=1.00 3. The Medium level may have some vanilla restrictions on the number of towers or fortresses.

So... Just as I described it? Say a cav is at the last sheep and I tell him to hunt a gazelle afterwards, then he continues to hunt gazelles?

It doesn't work like that, I just tested it with the Corral. They do continue with the species of the last queued animal, as would be expected, but the animals neither specifically queued nor belonging to the species of the last queued animal are left alone.

Yes, but actually no, because the hunter would then continue with the species of the queued individual animal. (I'm pretty sure that's how it works.)

CTRL has its uses, but wouldn't do the hunt thing. CTRL+A rotates the view for me (I think I didn't define that).

I use ctrl or ctrl +A to attack in an area

UPDATE 0.6.0: Hero Promotion The promotion system has been redesigned When a Hero appears on the map, they gain +1 XP per second Only the selected Hero gains experience When upgrading to a different Hero, experience is calculated separately Every 25 seconds (25 XP), the aura bonus gradually increases. Example (Before) Rank 1 Bonus = 0% Rank 2 300 XP required Bonus +15% Rank 3 300 XP required Bonus +15% A Hero with 250 XP will be at Rank 1 with a 0% bonus Changes: Hero with 25 XP has a bonus of approximately 1% with 50 XP has a bonus of approximately 2% with 250 XP has a bonus of approximately 12% etc.

@Vrayer If you want to could add a poll to this thread (maybe also change the title) and if people think units should continue to hunt other animals it could be done for next release. It could also be possible to do it depending on animal "stance" for example units would keep hunting any other non-aggressive animals or any animals basically in the same stance that your initial order was.

To do this, you would just need to remove this line: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/src/commit/9598c6c2e1f4cc58f92d4fd6a54fda39ad195bf9/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/UnitAI.js#L2755 But beware this line was obviously here for a reason. For example, if you are slaughtering a bunch of sheeps but an elephant comes by, then your units will attack this elephant.

But, if I'm not wrong, you would be tasking the hunt of individuals, and not whole (nearby) species. I see some use for things to be the way they are, that is, not to switch to an aggressive species, but I've also noticed the additional micro @Vrayer is referring to. Something I thought could be useful would be an "Target in Area" button, where after pressing it one would adjust the area of a target circle, and all attackable (Gaia and enemy for example) units inside it would be queued to be attacked. This would be useful for hunts and fights, not having to precisely pinpoint some target. It would also avoid a weird issue I usually have, which is that after the target unit is killed, the attackers retreat to their previous position instead of keep killing enemies they have just beside them, although maybe this is related to their stance.

I have successfully created terrein elevation(mountain, rivers) by importing custom height map. But the issue is map design. Either need a nice paint brush that put trees and other decorations(land design) just by moving the cursor(like rise of nations, aoe). Or availability of importing a seperate specialized image(tree position, land design) over the imported height map. Specialised image might have to have same size as the imported height map. Defining map size in scenario editor could be more easy/defined. As the era of ai has started, player shouls have the option to quick import height maps and play. Another thing(extra topic), player ai should behave with more logically(like real human players) and option to add more player slots(aom has 11, we can have more). Stay well.