All Activity

https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/wiki/Home#user-content-technical-design-documentation I think I found what I was looking for. But I don't know if I'll be able to understand it.

Catapults are boring and slow. Slingers are fun.Or they felt like they were.They were literally mini catapults. Sparta is just a re-skin of Athens but not fun I mean 0 fun. Champion hoplites and that's it.

Rome was very fun in A23 because we had strong catapults and bolters to reduce those annoying slinger blocks to smoking craters

But these are only appearances.They are not fun. In alpha 23 they had slingers and all the slinger civs were fun.

They have two of the coolest-looking units in the game, along with one of the coolest Heroes. Literally Teutonic Knights with a spear. But seriously, they had Royal Stoa where they trained Mercenary champions. That was considered non-historical, so their unit roster was reduced.

but your cc cant outrun anything (until the introduction of nomadic civs, that is)

What a great idea you gave me, a taming system. Like in Ark Survival.

But Sparta is boring.It's the civilization with the least diversity and gameplay in the game. It's nothing special.

They are op, but few can exploit their opness as a food source because of the activation cost. In late game, switching to sheep farming is a recipe for victory. Patches of sheep near your territory also gives you the opportunity to boom with Cav. Trolling aside, I think Spartiates is not yet enough to be op because any unit can outrun them

Gender is conditioned by simulation. Sheeps are OP.

How are the others related? How do they appear registered within the game, I read that one must be through interface or hotkey.

I understood that, but not completely at the time. So anything I want to register in the engine must have a counterpart, for example, if I register "absurdity" I must create an "absurdity.js".

@Classic-Burger, it usually contains only one line, which registers the component in the Engine. For example, if your component file is named "Builder.js", the interface (with the same name) file would contain: Engine.RegisterInterface("Builder"); Note that the "Builder" here is a name of the constructor inside "Builder.js" component. The constructor name and file name should match, for consistency.

What does the interface do?

Files inside that folder usually contain only one line, to register the component with the Engine. You need also "Conversion.js" inside the "components" directory. This should contain the logic. Inside "components": Inside "components/interfaces":

I did not

You do know that "/s" stands for sarcasm?

I was thinking of an alternative component to capture animals. I'm looking to learn how the game works, I've already written 4 basic components. The first component is in the interface. Other commands like capture, attack, and healing have that. Conversion.js [inside components/interface folder] The second is a component to determine "convertibility" entity to be convert. Convertible.js The third is instructions on how the healer/converting unit converts. I called it converter.js or conversion.js One contains the instructions for the target unit and the other contains the instructions for the priest. That's the easy part so far, then comes the complex or long part.

Did you just assume their gender?!

Of course, and most likely it will be on how female citizens are so op and need to be nerfed

If you think about it, it's a good thing because it will generate another post later. In the end, the circle will be complete.

Actually it’s not broken but it’s OP. The poster is just trolling that he is only playing SP. He knows situation in the lobby. I watch your game with IRush and you almost got beaten and in fact he just resigned in frustration but was leading you in the end. You were just lucky to be Iberian and he never anticipated that his spartiates can get trapped. He did the same strategy on OP team game and positioned on the border and beat his opposing side. He repeated it and was doubled without help so he/they lost. If there was no help from opposing teammates that opponent becomes cosmic. Now like Reza he is challenging good/decent players and no one accepts. With small map on 1v1 mainland it’s harder to counter the rush if you’re just a decent player. Separates (is a champion) are strong units that really doesn’t belong in P1. Fanatics being OP is not in doubt but at least they are in P2.

I see your point, and I agree that this alpha brought more variety and dynamics in team games compared to older versions. I also like that captures add another layer of tactics. Also I think a lot of strategy of today were usable in past too. It more about how people play and communicate. I remember 2 big army in phase 2 could take a CC even with 20 citizen troop inside even in previous alpha. My concern is mostly about late game (Phase 3) when some strong buildings like CCs or fortresses can still fall relatively quickly to capture. In those cases, I feel destruction (with siege or units) should remain the primary way, otherwise capture sometimes feels too cheap compared to the investment in defending and upgrading. Tower seems annoying to use (put men inside etc) for a low result and easy capture. 3 or 5 men can't give enough capture resistance. But you can tell me we can obstruct access to the tower, it true and I do. I will try do more tower for have an opinion Maybe the solution is not to make captures impossible, but to adjust ratios depending on the building type and upgrade level. Civilian buildings and light towers could remain easy to capture, but core military buildings (CC, fortresses, barracks with garrison) should require much bigger numbers unless the attacker has already crippled them. If you play a civ with hero elefant you can't have a CC with hero garnison. That way, we could keep the current dynamics you enjoy (more tactical choices, not always relying on siege), while still ensuring that capturing a well-defended CC in late game doesn’t become too much of a shortcut. What do you think of this middle ground? Just run on cc and then capture all building is annoying. It should be exceptional situation. if you invade an enemy without army to defend or refusing the fight, you still can capture and destroy some building in my point of view, they enemy will be hurt and he don't recovery easy. He still has to micro for garnison some men in the important building, just less. It open also the strategy of counter attack in some way. also i said " here’s always the option of heavily damaging a building to force the garrison out before attempting to capture it. " with some military tech, the cc it easy to destroy if your opponent have no army. I will add in the most of situation, except if you retard spam them, palisade give a fake feeling of security (and that's normal for the low cost of ressource invest), they are easy to destroy if you right clic with an entire army on it. I like a lot turtle and protect my building with other building for win some time.

That was the case in previous alphas. It forced on the 'get sieges and attack' build. This alpha we see a wider variety of builds and team strategies in TGs. It also introduce a interesting balance between optimizing fields, and having to protect your CC with a bit with other buildings (A cc surrounded by fields, have no reasons to be hard to capture). Your base is not protected by default against an army if you have no defenders. You can still build defenses (palisades a few towers are rather cheap and can help tones) that will give much more time to get allied defenders to your base. There is a wider skill gap now (and that isn't some clicky boring mechanic) about defending tactics. You need to put best units in buildings, you need to know how to play with the greed of your enemy who'll try to capture your buildings... I love turteling this alpha, because buildings are very strong, but it stays dynamic and interesting, due to not having every single building having to be rammed down. Overall when capturing was impossible, game stalled much more often and that wasn't so fun. Sieges are useful in many situation, but are just no longer mandatory to take out a CC if you have much more superior forces in enemy base.

I think that a building such as the Civic Center or military training structures, when properly defended (with at least half of their garrison capacity filled), should be almost impossible to capture in Phase 3—except in cases of an overwhelming numerical difference, for example at least a 1-to-15 ratio (10 defenders against 150 attackers, not counting champions or mercenaries). The idea is to avoid capture becoming the “default option,” and instead make destruction through units or siege weapons the more realistic and relevant solution. Of course, there’s always the option of heavily damaging a building to force the garrison out before attempting to capture it. On the other hand, I think it would be interesting to keep a moderate capture speed depending on the type of building: Light civilian buildings or watchtowers could still be captured quite quickly, as they are now. Un-upgraded towers could resist capture at about a 1-to-5 ratio (e.g., 3 defenders vs. 15 attackers), while upgraded towers could resist at about a 1-to-10 ratio (5 defenders vs. 50 attackers), with capture becoming much slower beyond that. Military buildings without defenders should still be capturable, but they ought to resist better. We just need to find the right balance so that capturing them isn’t a trivial action but more of a time sink for the attacker.