All Activity

This platform is a modern traffic marketplace where you can purchase or monetize site traffic. Boost site visibility and develop your website with affordable traffic solutions.

This website lets you sms for quick online verification. The strongest reason to use it is the extra layer of privacy it provides.

Traftop.biz is a trusted visitor exchange where you can purchase or monetize site traffic. Increase online presence and develop your project with affordable traffic solutions.

@Red Wolf, maybe edit your post to add numbers to your suggestions, so the following is easier to read: I disagree with 2, 11 and 15 (standard practice doesn't mean good practice, I'm strongly against spontaneous combustion). I agree with 1, 12 (also proposed it), maybe 4, 5, 13 and somewhat 6. 14 would be nice, but not a priority, I guess. Regarding 3, the default size should just be bigger, many have complained already, and honestly, I find it offensive to people that have sight problems. I got super used to it, but I remember thinking how unnecessarily dumb it looked. Regarding 7, this is easy to find in Settings > Hotkeys, start writing "mi" and you see "Select military only: Alt", so just use that modifier. Regarding 9, you said "snap", go to Settings > Hotkeys, start writing "sn" and you see "Toogle snap-to-edge: Ctrl", so just use that modifier. Regarding 16, as usual, Settings > Hotkeys, start writing "id", the hotkeys are "." and "-". If you literally meant "button", yeah, maybe, or could eventually be right-clicking on it, or similar. Regarding the rest, I'm quite neutral and would like to listen to arguments.

Greetings to the 0 A.D. devs and community. It has been many years since I first encountered the game, but only now have I dedicated enough time to it to truly understand it. I hope my observations prove useful to the devs and make as much sense to the community as they did to me while playing. The game is fantastic—a gift from the devs to strategy game fans like myself—and it is a privilege to be able to play it for free! 1) When animals attack gatherers, nearby gatherers should automatically defend them. The same applies to gatherers who are also military units when enemies attack them. I have lost entire groups of gatherers to wolves because I didn't notice they were under attack; after all, the units appear small on screen due to their scale relative to the buildings. 2) Houses should provide a population capacity of 20, not 15. Units are trained very quickly in this game, and the housing capacity falls behind rapidly. 3) More options for adjusting the UI size need to be added. It is very small at 1920x1080 resolution; unit icons, buttons, names, and text all appear too small. 4) In the floating info panel (which appears when hovering the mouse over a unit, building, or technology button), the items could be arranged in this order: Unit/building name; Costs; Unit type; Command instructions—all spaced out, with the name and costs in a larger font than the rest of the text. The way the text is currently formatted—all bunched together and uniform in size—makes it difficult to quickly scan for the information a player might be looking for. 5) Some Formations could be eliminated; "Battle Line" and "Close Order" could be merged into a single formation. 6) The "YOU ARE BEING ATTACKED BY" message urgently needs to appear larger and flashing—ideally above the bottom UI bar. Placing it there would make it more visible and prevent it from being confused with AI messages requesting resources (as happens to me, since AI requests resources so frequently that sometimes I ignore them altogether). 7) I missed having an easy drag-and-select option for military units. 8) Selecting a Corral and right-clicking on it should automatically cause the animals raised there to garrison inside. 9) When placing a building foundation near existing structures, they could automatically align or "snap" to the side, similar to Age of Empires III. This helps ensure there are no gaps between them. While rare, builders can sometimes get stuck between structures because of this issue. 10) Wall towers could be upgraded to fire at enemies. 11) Certain Stone and Metal source models are easily confused; This makes it necessary to hover the mouse over the resources to identify them, rather than simply looking at them. 12) The feature where you click and hold the right mouse button to choose the direction units will face is very useful in similar games and could be added here as well. 13) Walls built next to trees, cliffs, or water almost always leave tiny gaps between the wall and the terrain feature. The placement silhouette turns red—blocking construction—even when a gap exists. Players should be allowed to build walls slightly into these elements. 14) Until more complex building-collapse animations are created, have the buildings tip to one side as they fall, like in Empire Earth. It's a simple animation that looks really cool! 15) Signs of destruction on buildings as they lose health are barely noticeable. Add flames that grow in intensity as health drops, as is standard practice. 16) There should be separate buttons for idle villagers and idle military units. 17) The Gold and Stone icons on the minimap are very helpful! I’m still waiting for those in Age of Empires II. Please share your thoughts.

I think our model should have roughly the same footprint as the existing stone theater model, which means that the shape from the second image from @Genava55 fits much better for our needs. And the Skene would be made of wood and fabric then.

@nifa, AC's picture resembles the 2nd that @Genava55 posted, but I'd guess the 1st one he posted is a bit more accurate, being more elongated. Nothing remains from wooden theatres, but one can see the layout of the earliest stone ones, an example being the one at Thorikos, the world's oldest known theatre, from around 500 BC (https://theatreofancientgreece.blogspot.com/2014/08/ancient-theatre-of-thorikos.html): The Euonymon Theatre in Trachones would be another example (for more details, and mention of others: https://www.theatrum.de/382.html). Additionally, the Oxford Classical Dictionary states, regarding the early Theatre of Dionysus in Athens, that "late 19th-cent. excavations suggested a circular orchestra; many now prefer to think of a rectilinear orchestra" (thus hard to say something about its exact shape, considering others just state "possibly in Pi-shaped arrangement around the orchestra"), "the stage and most probably the stage building were wooden at this period; some think that there was no stage building till shortly before the Oresteia in 458 BC", while before "the stage was about a metre high with a flight of steps in the centre communicating with the orchestra". It was rebuilt in stone in 350 BC (although in many cases there are intermediate stages, like the first rows only being made of stone, but this would be too much for the game, for now).

bullshit yes my message is useless, but how you know it is a bot? maybe it just someone copy paste a lot of command ! you privacy about multi account is so retarded it is like a religion and religon suck rules are here for change. Why a bot is not allowed? what the purpose?

Ok, I guess javelineers aren't so bad. I think they were in the base game, and I just assumed they were as bad in here too

I see, although usually they have to wait hours or days for an answer to whatever they ask, so in principle I don't think the problem is as serious as it initially might seem.

From assasins creed. Should we go for something similar, especially with the stage? Is it historically accurate?

Sorry, my statement was incomplete: bots run by players aren't permitted, the ones run by Wildfire Games are of course permitted (and are actually necessary to run the multiplayer lobby). What we need is a server, which can run headlessly, so without requiring a graphics card. It also has to be resource efficient, easy to isolate (e.g. by running it inside a Firecracker micro VM) and maintainable (so no re-implementation of the required functionality, but reuse of code we already have in pyrogenesis). Additionally it should be integrated into pyrogenesis and XpartaMuPP, so whether or not to use a dedicated server is an option in the game UI rather than sending chat messages. That'd also allow us to use it for rated games, something which isn't possible with an unofficial solution. It's probably also a good idea to get in touch with us developers while developing such functionality, so we can provide guidance where necessary, to avoid work which results in something which doesn't fit our needs and standards (for example a change of the network layer from UDP to QUIC is in the works right now (https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8925), which would require changes to a dedicated server as well). That said, if we're talking about ways to improve the ability of players to join multiplayer games and improve their performance, proper support for IPv6 (https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/projects/9) is something I personally would like to see as a step before adding dedicated server functionality.

Personally I've been/still am reluctact as it would mean that genuine new users might have to wait a number of hours before their first post is approved, and in the mean time they might give up. No matter what we do or don't do there's always a cost somewhere, so the question is what is reasonable. I did suggest changing things in this manner in a staff-only topic, but there were other suggested ways to try and limit the issue that we might try beforehand.

I just don't really get cav. I like having units that can gather, and then fight when I need them to. I guess that just how I play though, maybe I should just use a different civ

Yes, Mace is a little different and tough. But you have strong p1 allied cav that only cost food.... you can unlock slingers p1. Yes you should also notice although Mace p1 units are "weaker" they are cheaper and train faster... mace is more about eco early on and getting to p2. We didnt want civs to play practically identical to one another. I can show you how to play to each civs strength, we can team up against the AI. And Im sure there are people better than me who could really play into the strengths even more.

Sorry, I meant change Macedonian I mean javelineers/archers are pretty bad, at least early game, like with Macedonian. It is hard starting out with archers being the only non metal guy

I don't want you to change Rome! Again, I would have to watch you play, play with you to give you some ideas. But Rome is definitely one of the stronger civs that doesn't need too much help. What makes spearman horrible units? So then should we change the tribal units that start with spearman/javelineers? I think we should play some games together so you can see how each civ can be quite strong.

Oh, I didn't realize that. How are you supposed to get going then, just get a bunch of units, then go to P2, or have horrible units? If you want me to change it, I can

No, p1 rome starts with spearman from CC and Barracks... are you playing the same mod? ) I have thought about macedonians ones a little.... and since we reduced resistances on pikeman im also considering removing that metal cost. But again for now Im focused on bugs, and improving AI.

Sorry if I keep saying the same thing

The Problem with the Roman one, is you can only get it from the cc, not the barracks. So you can't mass produce them very well. Also, with Macedonian the basic pikeman costs metal, and that is hard for starting, because archers are pretty bad in my opinion. Another thing is that the Roman Siege catapult did very little damage, is that intentional or a bug?

The original roman spearman p1 doesnt cost any metal at all. If you go p2 too soon.... thats on you for not having your resources figured out! P1 rome is fine, spearman 50/50 and Javelineer 50/50 just like base game costs.

I just think that every civ should have a lowish cost unit, for getting started. So, if you are starting with 300 or each resource, I think it is nice not having to worry about metal for a little bit, and still have decent army. Also, not being able to train them from the barracks seems hard. It is either metal or horrible cs ranged units from barracks. I would rather save my metal for Champions. Maybe for the Roman spearman, you could pay metal to upgrade them, instead of auto upgrading. I know that the armor would technically cost metal, but I think this is one of those things that playability is more important than reality.

Ok, but what unit? They didnt really rely on spearman. And Spearman are our only melee unit that doesnt cost metal And maybe even they should cost metal. I guess it really comes down to what does the cost represent. Food to "grow" the soldier, other resources for the equipment used? Then really most melee have some form of metal armor... I'm willing to redo our cost system... but I would like more imput and clearity on what it should represent.

Maybe the Ai being harder isn't bad, but I think you should be able to get a cs non ranged unit that doesn't cost metal from cc and barracks. And maybe that is just my bad strategy, but I rely on them alot