Leaderboard

I found myself spending more and more time reading the logs in public transportation, and it's not always nice to do it on a phone. So I decided to take advantage of my recent Android lessons and make a small app that gets the latest log on the server. You can swipe up to refresh and filter the trac and phabricator bot so that only real person messages are displayed. I integrated an auto refresh feature too. To make it work you have to refresh once after ticking the options in the menu. Here is the github link: https://github.com/StanleySweet/0A.D.Logviewer

I'm pretty sure he's referring to the cavalry attacking in matrix-like slow-motion looking stupid, it's very noticeable when they attack. Nothing to do with numbers, but the visual effect of them attacking. Mix spear cav against some "high fire rate archers" and I'm pretty sure I'd report some issue with the animations if I didn't know that those attack speeds are consequence of the unit balancing.

Hi again, this time I decided to open a thread that will regroup all sieges discussions in order to keep the subforum clean and avoiding multiple threads that basically could share some stuff into. I'll start with talking about Siege Tower and Ram garrison/ungarrison possibility. Historically those 2 sieges are meant to transport units by garrisoning them through an entrance in the back of those sieges, letting units protect the engine. In game, the siege will unload units from its front preventing the siege to move and blocking its way to the target. Actually this is very annoying because in order to protect the ram, the units will block the siege, expecially if it is already near to hit an enemy building, making it vulnerable from behind anyway, with the result that the ram can be still be reached and destroyed without the possibility that the ram could actually do any damage at all. For the siege tower, the main issue is that its damage is low and it is preferable to garrison it with melee units in order to prevent nearby enemy units to hit the siege tower because garrisoning the siege with ranged units wouldn't be effective as using those units when ungarrisoned. So, in order to maximize the damage, since the units garrisoned inside are melee, retiring the tower and ungarrison units when the enemy is close to it seems reasonable, by the way, since the siege tower unload units in its front, the result is that the unloaded units will just block the siege tower. You can find a replay attached where you can see what I'm talking about. 16:XX min i train the siege towers 18:XX units prevent the retreat, 20:XX this time is even more evedent. Enjoy the video Siege Tower: the siege tower is aviable only for Ptolems and Macedonians. The siege tower is a siege (really??) that should be able to capture buildings or, at least, being able to crush buildings as any siege out there. Where are the issues? The cost doesn't fit its performance. Projectile Limit: the tower benefits from 10 garrisoned units only of a 20 units limit, it means that a siege tower is easier to capture if a player wants to optimize the number of units in the battlefield. It can't capture buildings: it could be able to capture building since it was historically used to open a way into the enemy walls when there were no more Suicidal Uruk'hai Berserker aviable . Low Damage: this needs a bit more explaination. The siege tower actually has only 2.5 crush damage per projectile shooted every 2 seconds. There is a tech aviable into the fortress which is supposed to increase the crush damage by 25% for all the sieges, tech that IMHO doesn't give any rilevant advantage to boolt shooters and siege towers (25% of 2,5 isn't really a big deal). 20 slingers can actually outdamage a siege tower, expecially because of the 10 projectiles limit, and they could even capture buildings, eventually. The only way to use that siege in a very effective way is/was to use the Macedonian hero Demetrios who increases the crush damage of sieges by +10 globally, without any range constraint, Aura that will be changed to +15% crush damage (if i remember right) in the alpha 22 and, as you can imagine, 15% of 2,5 isn't a big deal. The funny thing is that Demetrios can boost the damage of the siege tower from 2,5 crush damage to 12,5, privilege not aviable for ptolemaics (didn't test siege towers with Cleopatra aura yet). As you can notice in the attached replay, Catapults have 5 sec attack rate, so slow that a siege tower with Demetrios aura can outdamage them by far (even rams out damage catapults easly) and how a siege tower boosted by that aura are able crush briton buildings really easy, maybe too easy, if compared to their base damage. Ram: [blank] Catapult: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/21631-a21-catapults/Boolt Shooter: [blank] 2017-01-30_0011.rar

A short, uneducated critique: compared to the previous versions, the new one is much better.

This is actually historically incorrect for the period. In the early history of Buddhism, he was never shown in physical form. Definitely not in that particular style. That comes much later. He's shown through symbols, Bodhi tree, empty throne, empty horse, empty chariot, stupa, etc. etc etc etc If you need a statue, Buddha, in the symbol of a Chakra Or Triratana

If you guys like it, here is a little ingame screenshot, and the files. cart_market.7z

Thanks Feneur! I have difficulty finding where to go to make a new topic so I just follow the conversations and post if it though sometimes half or maybe unrelated.

Not sure if it's worth since balance changes are so kind to be altered frequently. But yeah, that's the only solution if we can't flag certain anims to play it's animation twice since this is prone to happen more than with one unit during balance changes.

I agree that siege towers are too costly in their current state. Historically, siege towers were used to capture the walls of a city or a fortress. The entrance to the engine is located in the back, from where ladders are located leading to the different levels of the tower. Thus when ungarrisonning the siege tower, units should ungarrison at the back of it. Since of course in 0ad everything is scaled down a lot, it would be sensible to keep then garrison limit of 20 while maybe making it garrisonable by catapults and/or bolt-shooters. Summary of Siege Tower: It is a slow, awkward unit which doesn't have a high enough attack nor defence to justify the high cost of the unit. It is unworthy of the name of "Helepolis"(meaning "The Taker of Cities"), and should be just called an assault tower and not siege tower. Unfortunately, the siege in 0ad is still very weak and can be easily destroyed. A few upgrades for siege(like blacksmith for organic units), for example 2 levels of armour and 2 levels of attack upgrades might make sense. Currently, 5 champs are enough to destroy any siege in just seconds, making siege only worth to train once you got a huge army of champs to defend, then do one of those "lightning sieges" where you do most damage not with siege but with champs.

The AI made a lot of progress from Alpha 20 to 21. Respect the AI is now kind of intelligent and very strong. It is now one of the best AI's I have seen in strategy game. But the problem with the AI is still that they show specific patterns and uses the same paths and tactics. In addition the AI on level medium and higher is faster in building economics, army and attacks very fast. The problem is the AI does not change their behavior once you are able to defend yourself the AI will run over and over into your towers, walls and other positions. It would be nice if the fighting style of the different AI levels would differ. I would for example expect that AI level medium and hard would train more elite soldiers and make more use of siege engines. Furthermore it would be nice to have AI characters. Stronghold for example has a couple of characters each of which has their own fighting style. Using this basic idea in 0 A.D. could mean to have: - the Petra AI (attacks fast with a medium size army) - the Bandit (who attacks constantly with small cavalry/infantry your weakest points with the goal to disrupt your economy and kill your citizen) - the Economist (defensive, but has a lot of money and resources. He can easily replace any loss of him or his ally.) - the General (takes time to attack, but if he attacks he attacks with a large army) - the Lord (defensive player, which builds a castle and tower to defend his position) What is your opinion on that?

I think they just need to be tougher and not even deal crush damage, that way you can just park them in front of enemy defenses to keep archers away from the walls so rams or sappers , catapults or whatever can work in a more secure environment. Then again, I'm opposed to the lightning sieges consisting of rams and champs bowling over everything

@Grugnas: looking at http://trac.wildfiregames.com/log/ps/trunk/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit_mechanical_siege_tower.xml will provide you some element.

The problem with that is that walls are not capturable, I do agree performance/cost ratio of siege towers is a bit too low. Demetrius's aura should probably be fixed, that doesn't sound like it was intended to turn siege towers into lawnmowers

Default by capture might not be user friendly to most but it's fine with me. I play single player hard and had fun with it. I'm sure for multiplayer it's an added strategy too which is good. I was playing a 1v1 against very hard AI on Mediterran on skirmish and planning just to build a fort behind him on top of the hill and prevent AI from clearing the trees and mines. I left the stockpile for future use in clearing some tree and possibly take some metals but the building turns into Gaia when I deleted the civic center below the hill, I was surprised! Fun enough to find out you can recapture it and can still be used as drop site! Captured buildings and garrisoned is one best feature and real too! I know most players are used to have attack and destroy as default but capturing first can add up to strategy. You capture a tower, house, temple, barracks etc and use it. As long as it requires to be garrisoned to stay yours it's nice! If you planned to attack and capturing buildings for your tactical use and use the attack/destroy default more chance that the building will be destroyed.

Speaking of broken animation: Alpha 21 seems to apply melee damage at every FIRST frame of the animations, when the swordsmen are only ABOUT TO SWING, and the hoplites are only ABOUT TO THRUST their spears I have no idea what kind of re-constructions was done, but was this fixed in the svn?

@Juli51 Thank you very much. I'm happy you're working on an African minifaction. I read about it a while back, and I'm excited to see how it turns out. Your artworks are absolutely beautiful, I like them very much. Something about Nubia and related terms: The term is quite confusing at times because it refers to many possible things: 1) A geographical area generally identified as the area between the 1st and the 6th cataracts. 2) Nubian people, who descend from the Noba, 4th century Nomadic settlers on the Nile between the 1st and 3d cataract. 3) Nuba people, a distinct collection of Southern Sudanic tribes, mainly in Kordofan. 4) Nubian languages, refers a Nilo-Saharan language group, spoken by the descendants of the Noba, as well as Nuba people. The Kushites pose a serious question mark here, because Kushites don't seem to be Nubian at all. They didn't speak a Nubian language, they spoke Meroitic (neither Nilo-Saharan, nor Cushitic). Nubian, in ancient Egypt, seems to refer mostly to the people directly to the south of them, and those people formed a buffer between the Egyptians and "the wretched Kush". Kushites often warred against, and subjugated the people of Lower nubia. An additional point is that Kushite territory stretched far beyond Nubia. Some of it's most important cities weren't in Nubia at all, but to the south of it. Meroe itself lies between the last two cataracts. I guess this means a minifaction called the Nubians, side by side with a fully playable faction called the Kingdom of Kush, might be feasible. Although they might be too similar because Kush dominated all of Nubia throughout most of 0AD's timeframe. But you could call your faction Noba, representing the time when they were dwelling in the Western desserts, free from Kushite control. But they would essentially look like an impoverished Kush. There are a number of other attractive African options that are relevant to 0AD's timeframe, but can't be represented with a full civ because we don't know enough about them. But know enough for basic building sets and units: The Garamantes, a Saharan population with a capital at Germa (Garama). They fought wars with the Romans. And of course there's the Numidians. Perhaps the early Axumites, they were quite a powerful, urban culture, but we know relatively little about them. You could also "invent" a generic African mini faction, based on any number of tribes that might interest you. Nuba are perhaps some of the most "stereotypical" Africans, and are what many people would expect to see from "the dark continent". Half naked, throwing spears, round mud huts with thatched roofs… You get the picture. But there is a certain charm to them. Almost "noble savage-like", and their culture seems unchanged from ancient times, so you could use very recent info on Nuba people, like photographs. Either way, I believe the Meroitic Kingdom of Kush, should be a fully playable civ, and it would be really nice to have another African miniciv to compliment them. In reaction to your work, I love both pieces, and especially the second one (a common house I presume) looks quite Kushite. The large ceramic pot, fixed in the floor in the corner of the courtyard is very good. I saw pictures of that in archeological digs of Meroitic sites... The first one, although I love it, is based on "the Old Dongola mosque", and was originally the throne hall for the Kings of Makuria. I believe it is 9th century, from Christian Nubia. That having said, it's basically just a continuum of the masonry culture developed in Kush, so you could still use It I guess. Fig. 69 A reconstruction of "the Old Dongola mosque" in it's original state, (before it's conversion to a mosque?). I made a quick sketch of a Meroitic house based on the layout you presented in your second work, "the common house". I adjusted the design, to incorporate Kushitic architectural elements. Like a narrow hall with barrel vault roof. I also made the windows facing outward very small, and placed them high in the wall, so that intruders can't crawl through them. I made the roof of the smaller structure out of palm branches, supported by a light wooden frame. This provides shade, but allows smoke to leave the room, which is how they made their kitchens. It makes for good cooking. I also added some improvised decoration to the front wall Fig. 70 My sketch of a (lower-) middle class Meroitic house from the Kingdom of Kush. A good model for a common Kushite house. @SDM Thank you very much. I'm passionate about history in general, and African history in particular, so I'm all to familiar with the difficulties in getting access to quality information. I was 13 years old when I first read about Kush, and it wasn't until I started this thread, that I realized how little I really knew about them. I wanted to share what I've learned so far, because I know how difficult it is to visualize them. Hmm, my background is a bit complicated. My father is Ghanaian, and my mother is part Belgian, part German, part Polish. I was born and raised in Belgium, but I've been living in Ghana for a few years now. I studied science in high school, and attempted applied economics at college (University of Antwerp). All that neoliberalism wasn't really my thing (plus I was a terrible student...). I went to art school in the weekends. Since then I've just been reading, working and thinking.

Trashed the concept completely. Should be less repetitive now.

I have changed the donation page. The edgy Network for Good thingo is gone and a nice standard PayPal button has replaced it. It is also at the top of the page. I would like the Treasury Committee's approval to consolidate all of the Flattr funds and all of the legacy PayPal funds into our SPI funds and to cancel the Flattr account. I'll conduct that discussion in a separate thread.

Ah, don't worry. I'm glad I could help, and better it was something easy to solve than something that was truly wrong with the game

Fishing boats are usually too slow to catch whales, so you probably have to kill a whale with a military ship first, and then gather from it with a fishing boat.

Use spearman from aboard a ship or a fishing boat if you can catch up to the whale lots of food the collect IIRC merchant ships not military . Enjoy the Choice

Is there anyway to set a default stance for when you assign a rally point to units coming out of the barracks? For example if you want to set Aggressive / Violent vs. Defensive, I am trying to save time in this step. Or is it only assignable once the unit has been trained? The default of Aggressive isn't what I always want in certain scenarios so just curious ... Thanks.

Latest alpha XX, 0.0.20-1~bpo8+1 on Debian Jessie. Thanks for the tips. I will beat the AI in very easy mode, I will.

Well, the best way to help the project is to give your time if you have any skills which can be useful And after that in priority comes helping out by testing the game and tell people about it. Only in third place is donating Not sure what we can change, adding another way to donate would complicate things unnecessarily (especially since all services has got some kind of fee and the more spread out the money is, the less we get to spend for the game). Don't worry though, donating is completely optional and not necessarily the best way to help either as I said above