Jump to content
  1. Welcome

    1. Announcements / News

      The latest. What is happening with 0 A.D. Stay tuned...

      4,7k
      posts
    2. Introductions & Off-Topic Discussion

      Want to discuss something that isn't related to 0 A.D. or Wildfire Games? This is the place. Come on in and introduce yourself. Get to know others who are using 0 A.D.

      37,2k
      posts
    3. Help & Feedback

      Here is where you can get help with your questions. Also be sure to tell us how we are doing. What can we improve? What do you wish we could do better? Your opinion matters to us!

      13,5k
      posts
  2. 0 A.D.

    1. General Discussion

      This is the place to post general stuff concerning the game. Want to express your love for hoplites or find people to play the game with? Want to share your stories about matches you have played or discuss historical connections to the game? These and any other topics which are related to the game, but don't have their own forums belong in this forum.

      43,7k
      posts
    2. Gameplay Discussion

      Discuss the game play of 0 A.D. Want to know why the game plays the way it does or offer suggestions for how to improve the game play experience? Then this is the forum.

      19,6k
      posts
    3. Game Development & Technical Discussion

      A forum for technical discussion about the development of 0 A.D. Feel free to ask questions of the developers and among yourselves.

      40,6k
      posts
    4. Art Development

      Open development for the game's art. Submissions, comments, and suggestions now open.

      29,6k
      posts
    5. Game Modification

      Do you have any questions about modifying the game? What will you need to do what you want to? What are the best techniques? Discuss Modifications, Map Making, AI scripting and Random Map Scripting here.

      38,7k
      posts
    6. Project Governance

      Forums for decision-making on issues where a consensus can't be reached or isn't sufficient. The committees are chosen from among the official team members, but to ensure an open and transparent decision process it's publically viewable.

      146
      posts
    7. 373
      posts
  • Latest updates

  • Newest Posts

    • Part 1:  The core problem of 0AD is that the fundamental settings (designs) are incomplete, which hinders our ability to make improvements, for example, citizen-soldiers,  territory, phases and heroes.   1. Citizen-Soldiers   The original intention of adding citizen-soldiers was to combine worker units and soldier units of most RTS games into 1 category, in order to simplify the gameplay. However, this was not successful in practice. Eventually, we gave birth to 3 categories of workers: women, citizen infantry and citizen cavalry, on top of mercenaries who function as builders. Aside from them are the champions, mercenary cavalry and heroes, who cannot work. The division into these categories not only didn’t simplify the matter but replaced the 2 unit types with a much more complicated unit categorisation system, defying the purpose.   At the same time,  0AD aims to be historically accurate, but the design of citizen soldiers juxtaposes with the aim because it relies on the principle that all civilisations have similar basic unit trees and identical stats, for balance.  For example, some civs have archers while others don’t. In order to balance the civs, archers are javelineers cost identical amounts of resources and archers had their attack stats weakened to a historically inaccurate extent just to compensate for the javlineers’ range disadvantage. This results in later-added archer civs (e.g. Han, Scythians, Kushites) being placed at a disadvantage in military, even though historically they were quite advanced in military and technology. On the contrary, in a RTS with a clear division between workers and soldiers, all you needed to do was to give archers a higher skill requirement and more resource cost to balance.   Aside from this, in order to not overcomplicate the units required to boom your eco, citizen soldiers cost mostly wood and food, which not only banished the classification of units based on demands for rare metal prevalent in other RTS games (in AoE, javlineers and spearmen who cost only food and wood are separate from their swordsman and cavalry units which cost metal), but also resulted in players floating spare metal. Since citizen soldiers and structures do not conflict with mercenaries in resource requirement, mercenaries which only cost metal become ‘cheap’, resulting in them destroying the balance. The immense demand for wood to build cities do conflict with the training of citizen soldiers. On low wood maps designed in the past, this troubles players without mercenary units (making Carth, Maury, Ptol OP on these maps).   The status quo of citizen-soldiers not only hinders the adjustments of stats based on historical facts, but also amplified the complexity of worker units and monopolised the demand for wood and food, which is not worthwhile. Therefore, refering to AoE, AoM, etc, I think we should make the following adjustments:   1. Adding civilians of both genders that only cost food. They have the highest efficiency at collecting resources and building structures. Use civilians to replace starting infantry. 2. Adjust all infantry except for heroes to become ‘frontline builders’, such that they can chop wood and build military facilities including siege engines. The efficiency of working is independent from their military rank. 3. All cavalry and infantry (except heroes) are ‘part time hunters’; they can gather hunt at a similar rate as civilians.   4. Citizen spearman, swordsman, pikeman, archer and cavalry cost different amounts of food and metal, only. Javlins and slingers who don’t need metal are defined as ‘trash units’
    • I've made a patch: D4654, could you test it with smoothlos = "true"?
    • @AIEND Has put much effort into typing up a document that outlines the fundamental problems of 0AD so far and solutions to fix them. Being an expert RTS player who has played a large variety of RTS games, his opinions will certainly be worth considering. The origininal document was typed in Chinese and I will translate it here. I believe this might provide a solution to the endless balancing discussions and new balancing issues the crop up every alpha.  Orginal document: 0AD修正[352].docx
    • https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/4545 New combat system. this rework is already important. But this one must go slow. The 3 ideas not fully implemented are these: Fire damage (development). Naval rework. @wowgetoffyourcellphone I had proposals. Macro-Counters (melee, cavalry, missile roles). Battalion (Development). Rework capturing. That's the basics of current combat that have been discussed lately. Not forgetting what is expected, secondary attack would change the way many units in the game.
    • Or maybe @Mercury could try that if they feel comfortable This way you can work on other stuff and guide them. About RAM usage keep in mind we are limited to 32bits on windows for now. See this.
    • This sounds a little like what I've done with D3186. I need to get around to profiling that better.
    • Eh, not much, but you're really not missing out. There's been very few threads in the past few years, and mostly internal drama.
×
×
  • Create New...