Leaderboard

I just lost hours of my work on another project, so I guess a big warning is in order. Transifex has a new "feature" that if you correct some strings offline and then upload, Transifex will silently ignore your changes. At least with translator permissions, I haven't checked yet if this also happened with reviewer permissions. Already reviewed strings are now completely impossible to correct offline - at least the upload window will inform our about that one. I already contacted Transifex about the issue.

Improvement Mod {yeah, couldnt think of a name...} (A mod aimed to reorganise the existing assets to provide a much better game experience. It includes game design and balance improvements.) I have created a mod based on the design I had suggested. As a proof of concept. Currently only one civ is working- Mauryans. And AI wouldnt use the features well. So its meant to be played on multiplayer- Mauryans vs Mauryans. In the beginning I'll focus on I) Improving gameplay, balancing diff strategies(Rush, Boom, Turtle) and units. Getting all the required features. Once that part is taken care of- II) Getting compatibility for all civs. Balancing between civs, and differentiating them. There have been done lot of changes. Since its the first version- many specifics could need rebalancing. I am open to all suggestions and opinions. But I request that you play atleast 10 games on it before forming an opinion, to get the hang of things. Modified Game design- (Red marks what is missing currently, Blue are temporary solutions) Dock and siege weapons have not been touched yet. I need help from the community regarding- 1) Implementation of Trader changes. 2) UI changes 3) Farmland bonus (native) 4) Exp gain bonus in territory 5) Better implementations of Upgrade mechanic, and house limits. 6) Play testing Note- Corral only garrisons animals if you Ctrl Rt click on it to make itself the destination. Once the animal spawns it cant garrison back. Apart from that Corral changes are fully functioning. To Upgrade units stand them as close to Barracks or stable as possible. It doesnt show, but under the effect of aura - the 1000 sec train time becomes 10 sec. Farm and corral are capturable in neutral territory. to make it preferable to destroying it. This is my first attempt at modding. But due the excellent layout of game it became very easy. I've been working on this straight for 2 days. Since I am leaving home tomorrow. And It'll be few months before I get back on it. Acknowledgements- Wildfire Games- For creating a wonderful game. Making it easily moddable. And the prompt replies when i asked for help. wowgetoffyourcellphone- For creating Delenda Est. Which I liked a lot and adopted some ideas from. Civic space and Corral aura have been modified from DE. improvement.zip

There is a middle ground, it just takes some fine tuning to realize. Gathering cavalry is not the issue here, its the snowball effect of cavalry gathering the resources necessary to make yet more cavalry in such a way that doesn't hamper economic growth. Another easy fix would be making cavalry take up two pop slots and giving them a slight combat buff and price hike to compensate. Else make them cost a resource that skews village phase gathering. There are several ways to go about fixing the problems presented that dont involve dismantling playstyles. A good question to ask is how extreme can we make our changes before we alienate our current player base? I don't bring this up over something as remedial as pushing raiding cavalry a phase forward, but you seem to have a distaste for citizen soldiers on a whole, which is one of the standout gameplay features of 0 AD.

I'm getting too much emotional stress with the Citizen Soldiers discussion (Remove... Revamp... Remove... Revamp). When it comes to two types of Farms: Corral? Prevent cav rushing? Don't make them available in yhe CC is my suggestion. But there's something I'm quitenot getting: Cav Rushing (fast attack) is the ONLY option... but then gathering ONLY is better than gather + attack. I mean, what?

Fritz here, thought I pop in for an intro. I used to mod in the Warcraft community, pretty enjoyable experience with the game so far. There seems to be a lot of clutter but from the looks of things since the games open source, many people contribute to the development so it will be improved fairly quick! This is great, and I am looking forward to releasing some mods and maybe contributing some time on the balance testing as well!

Isn't finished yet.

I can't really comment any further from how pyrogenesis "looks" because that can change. Well, gameplay can change, features can change, and maybe even its concept of RTS can change... just like any other engine. The only real difference I can point to is Open Source vs. Proprietary. People with Free Time vs. People who get paid.

Pyrogenesis used to be proprietary, and Bang! is still proprietary.

The only middle ground I can see is that Cavs shouldn't be available on the Civic Center. Only then will the brokenness of the Citizen Soldiers will be the point of discussion.

it rewards micromanagement, which would mean competitive players wouldn't build slow fields and new players would be forced to do so as well to stay on par. Which would mean slow fields would be redundant outside of campaigns and casual single player games. it'd be a no from me

Regicide: a no attacking unit could be changed instead of a hero Survival: first wave can be delayed Unknown nomad: You could add additional starting units. (all are easy changes) Instead of adapting the important core decision, adapt the secondary game modes.

Just sharing some ideas. (0AD resource scheme is fine in my opinion, a little lore-breaking sometimes, but is simple and very convenient.) Best game resource scheme, in my opinion, and also fits 0AD timeline (This game is Spartan:Gates of Troy by Slitherine Games, somewhat a predecessor to the Total War Series, IMO. The game Legion, also from Slitherine Games, is a Roman period counterpart of Spartan and is also part of the franchise) Resources: Gold: Gathered in gold mines, required for building temples and some important structures, (very profitable when traded) Grain/Food: Gathered in farms, used in training units, also consumed when maintaining standing armies. Iron: Gathered in iron mines, used in training specific units Bricks: Produced in brick factories, required in constructing buildings, essential in maintaining structures, buildings deteriorate when not maintained Horses: Bred in stables, used in training cavalry units Marble: Gathered/produced in marble pits, required in construction of specific buildings. Copper: Gathered in copper mines, very essential, required in training units Wood: Gathered in lumber mills, required in several buildings and units Silver: Gained from taxes, essential in trading, used/consumed to pay/maintain standing armies Trading is very crucial in this game, say for example, you have plenty of silver due to a high pop, but your brick factories cannot sustain your city, you will resort to trading to balance/meet the ends.

Hello! I'm back with a quick tutorial on how to make lowpoly trees taking advantage of Blender's 3D add-on "sapling tree generator" in less than 10 minutes! Here's a video tutorial from BlenderGuru with more in-depth information about how sapling add-on works: http://www.blenderguru.com/tutorials/how-to-make-a-christmas-tree/#

I'm all for removing stupid features, and could name a few (corral, imo capturing, I'd do away with anything that's not some type of farms for food, tbh…) , but I feel like you're getting it wrong on citizen soldiers. First: the point of citizen soldier is, first and foremost, the historical goodie. If we were to remove something, it should be the women, not the fact that military units can gather. I'd like to add that departing from the classic RTS formula isn't necessarily a bad thing, AoM had military units that could make buildings and that was a refreshing change. Your point about resource explosion is a little silly. Units can either gather OR attack, and that doesn't change from other RTS, so I don't see why it'd explode any more than another game. It's the fact that we start games with a farcical number of units and fast gather rates, as well as units being fast to recruit, that leads to apparent "explosiveness". Now, your calculation makes it sound like attacking is not worth it. But the math could be inverted rather simply if we lower gather rates and raise unit costs (including training time). If your attack takes 10 guys away from your eco (let's say for 120 food/minute, which would be far less than we get now, admittedly) and you manage to kill 3 enemy units (let's say each cost 50 food), then you're coming out on top by attacking. Other things must be factored in (buildings efficiency, how easy it is to garrison in 0 A.D. - imo by far the poorest design choice), but it's nothing structurally broken like you make it seem. Likewise, progress from weak to strong units has nothing to do with citizen soldiers and everything to do with how we (haven't) implemented technologies correctly.

Yes I do have a "distaste", and that for a good reason. I've already posted numerous times why it's bad and I don't want to write down the arguments again and again. one sentence to the "Citizen soldiers is THE standout gameplay feature of 0 AD". There are thousands of outstanding gameplay elements - Tactical combat, innovative economic management, special abilities, detailed tech trees that allow customization of troops with pro's and cons. Stuff like cavalry charges, trampling, combat bonuses in woods, stealth units, epic sieges etc etc. And you come up with "soldiers can collect food! isn't that awesome?!" If that really is the case I really pity the game. I mean c'mon, really? Exactly this. Since I've got a paragraph in mye resource design concept I've got a prepared text that summarizes it. So I can just keep copy'n'paste it everytime it's needed @LordGood In case you think Citizen gatherers has arguments that make it so unique and outstanding feel free to give them to me, apart from the ones I've stated below there seem to be none. However, I'm eager to hear about reasons to stick to it.

I will most likely return to continue the mod when I can spare the time and motivation. For now it's somewhere between low priority and occasional heavy brainstorming on gameplay choices (and on if I should work on this first or other projects).

Feel like there's absolutely no point having that in-game, but I would be okay with it for scenarios and whatnot however. Edit: that or the complete opposite of the above: I think it would be interesting to remove all other sources of food but farms, with mimo's changes in that patch, and offer a few different types of farms good at a few different things. For example a slow but steady gold source farm (say, peppers?), a fast-but-needs-a-ton-of-space-and-hard-to-defend type of farm (wheat?) and a slower-but-takes-less-space-and-you-can-have-several-villagers-per-farm type of farm (potato or whatever else ). edit: ah wait I forgot we don't have gold as a resource, nevermind that one then

No. The code or data files should be fixed so that those errors do not occur. Hiding them or adding the ability to hide them will just result in nobody reporting them (as they are hidden) and nothing will get fixed.

That's Romulus & Remus.

EDIT: trac ticket.

As a recap: giving the the soldiers the ability to gather is not something that makes 0 A.D. special to play. Instead, the current implementation is broken and probably the concept too. So either the concept should be improved or completely removed (to lazy to look up Darc's detailed explanation post with some suggestions to fix it)

Please don't post things to the suggestion thread unless they absolutely belongs there. I created this forum about twelve hours ago.

He got pwned.

Why a mauryan player would make them ? Compared to horse archers from other civs, this unit is way slower despite having almost the same stats. They got a little HP bonus but it is clearly not enough to make them worth it. Not only they are slow, but they can't be as massed as other horse archers because they're elephants and take more place. So their pathfinding is also difficult, and that makes them really weak against spearmen, or if they want to retreat it's also tricky anyway. They also can't collect ressources. No wonder i never see them in pro games. Also, I guess the "go berserk" in description is not implemented. Will they be buffed in next alpha ?

Mongol style horse archers depend on the stirrup for stability in the saddle and the stirrup did not reach the Mediterranean Area till the early Middle Ages same as the horse collar. Enjoy the Choice

@Lion.Kanzen Yo creo que el escudo le podria servir a Justus, podrias sugerirselo, se le podría colocar una aura que de mas armadura, el problema es que no se si el aura se pueda modificar para que solo afecte los que estan detras del escudo

the end result is the same, be forced into annoying micromanagement, or fall behind.

You're making an RTS, not a city building game. There is one type of resource to be gathered: food. So it's logical to only have one type of economic building to supply food. Introducing multiple food sources for civs doesn't reflect this. In theory, if you're doing multiple farms, there also should be additional ways to harvest lumber or mining minerals. Which leads more towards a city building gamestyle. Infinite resource gathering is used to create a simple, automatic process. If you make the gathering process less automated this process is automatically more complicated while not serving its original purpose (generate resources). Thus you automatically disrupt players from other game aspects. I'd suggest to play a couple of matches in AoE I and then reconsider why it's annoying to have to replant farms (which is similarly disrupting from a gameplay perspective). @feneur is right that extending the game mechanic with another building type doesn't have enough benefits up the game. Of course fields could be different in appearance from a random variation (some fields contain olive trees and some don't). Alternatively, there could be additional models for berry bushes. Or roman civs start with a certain amount of olive trees around their base as an additional food source early on which can be gathered quickly (similar to how Incas on AoE II start with an additional turkey).

The meaning of the lambda is Λακεδαίμων / Lakedaímôn, which is basically the other name of Sparta ( > Σπάρτα / Spárta in Dorian Greek=language group of the Spartan dialect, Σπάρτη / Spártê in Attic Greek=Athens's region Greek). EDIT: Historians suppose Spartan hoplites used to paint a lambda on their shield to recognize themselves on the battlefield. Athenians and Thebans used to paint their shields too, representing an owl and a sphynx respectively.

I advise you to take a look at this really serious channel that talks about armours and weapons precisely (particularly on the Romans and the Roman gladiators): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIjGKyrdT4Gja0VLO40RlOw Is there a list of the missing names?

I have suggsetions regarding Mauryan faction. The heroes- 1) Chandragupta Maurya - The founder. Was guided and advised by Chanakya since his childhood. Chankya was the one who plotted, and prepared young chandragupta to overthrow the then mighty Nanda empire(alexander's army revloted out of fear of them). because Nanda's had insulted Chankya. Chandragupta went on to unify india for the first time, and created the Maurya dynasty. He defeated alexandor's successor and recovered part of india conquered by alexander. But later through marriage established peace and trade with hellenic factions. Thus-> He needs to be a balanced hero. Giving both combat and economic benefits. Chankya cant be a separate hero, since they have a deep association. Training Chandragupta can enable Chankya from temple. Chankya could be like super priest which also has an aura to improve gathering. While Chandragupta can have a minor attack bonus- +2( to chariot archers)? Ashoka is the most reknown emperor from indian history. He has two facets. In his early life he was bad-tempered and of a wicked nature. Killed 99 of his brothers to ascend to throne. Was known for elaborate torture chambers- Ashoka Hell. And he further expanded the empire in 8 years. He embraced Buddhism after witnessing the mass deaths of the Kalinga War, which he himself had waged out of a desire for conquest. He felt remorse, and changed to non-violent buddhist ideologies. Contributed to society- spread of buddhism, edict of ashoka, asokastambh(pillar), ashoka chakra, sanchi stupa, taxila and nalanda university. In his edicts, Ashoka mentions some of the people living in Hellenic countries as converts to Buddhism[http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/dhammika/wheel386.html#rock14]. also he sent dutas(means messenger. but were buddhist monks) which spread budhism across the world(buddhism and martial arts to china) and india. 2) Chanda{चंड} Ashoka(Ashoka the Fierce)- Battle focussed hero. +5 combat. Alternatively- if people dont want to use this version of ashoka then- Samudragupta(335-380 AD). Known as Napoleon of india because of his conquests. never lost a battle. But is from Gupta dynasty. 3) Devanampriya Ashoka (Ashoka the Great)- Economy oriented hero. Ashokastambha are available to be built. give speed bonus to merchants and gathering/speed bonus to citizens. All temple researches and priest costs are halved.(useful once priests are able to convert in future). Alternately- if other civ's dont get this convert option. then a special unit "düta" can be enabled in temple through this hero which allows converting enemy units. And gives access to special temple researches boosting unit conversion, unit health regeneration, and unit los and morale. Inverse of how it is right now. Chandragupta should be riding a chariot, and ashoka mounted on an elephant (both archers). In the earlier periods the kings used to mount chariots(religious importance), but later this changed to Elephants as slowly chariots phased out. Mauryan Chariot archers are manned by 3 people. 1 charioteer, 1 noble warrior, another 1 employed warrior. So chariot archer needs to be expensive, high dps unit, more pop count, slow training, more range than foot archers(height advantage?), trample damage vs foot soldiers but less mobile than cav archer and vulnerable to mele cav. Elephant archer current stats are a joke. Elephant archer should have dual attack. Mele and ranged(able to switch them). an improved version of a war elephant, having good mele splash damage and high hp with mele(hack) resistance, but also a ranged attack(longer than chariot). they have 3 warriors with bows(in mounted tower) and one mahout. Elephants archers need to be very expensive and cost a of of pop(it takes a lot to feed and keep an elephant, along with the 4 mounted units), maybe a unit limit. it can have a negative aura for enemy mounted units (horses get scared of elephants). Can be countered by pikeman and spear man. The High range dps shouldnt be a balance issue because of high resource and pop cost. Chariot archer and Elephant archer play same role, and historically chariots got slowly phased out as elephants began to be used. So i propose - Chariot archer be unlocked by Chandragupta. Elephant archer be unlocked by ashoka. so that both are not present on batlefield together. This should only be based on first hero trained in a game, so that one cant get both by deleting a hero and training another one. This provides intresting choice ragarding unique unit- one is countered by mele cav, while one is countered by anti-cav. [http://historum.com/asian-history/40710-military-equipment-organization-army-mauryan-india.html] regarding the siege units- "By the Mauryan period the Indians possessed most of the ancient world’s siege and artillery equipment, including catapults, ballistas, battering rams, and other siege engines. A distinguishing characteristic of Indian siege and artillery practice was a heavy reliance on incendiary devices, such as fire arrows, pitch pots, and fireballs. There was even a manual instructing how to equip birds and monkeys with the ability to carry fire inside buildings and onto rooftops. This was not surprising in a country whose military fortifications and buildings were made mostly of wood. Fire was such a constant threat to Indian towns that thousands of water containers and buckets were required to be kept full and placed outside dwellings at all times to extinguish fires." Elephants should have mediocre siege. but they are not supposed to be the main siege unit against a fortified base. Indians under mauryan empire had access to all types of units.(all siege and also heavy cav-greek mercenary). because of good relations with different empires of that time. Also if the above mentioned chariots / elephant archers seem op then, building them can be restricted by having them train in batches- " Indian armies of this period had within them a basic unit called the patti, a mixed platoon comprising one elephant carrying three archers or spearman and a mahout, three horse cavalrymen armed with javelins, round buckler, and spear, and five infantry soldiers armed with shield and broadsword or bow. This twelve-man unit when assembled in three units formed a senamukha, or “company.” " The elephant archer(or chariot archer) should only be trainable in (expensive)batches along with 3 javelin cavalry, 5 champion maiden sword soldiers(switchable to archers) - 12pop (11 in case of chariot batches, also relatively cheaper). The champion swordsmen, archers or cavalry should still be trainable individually. [https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2015/11/10/the-mauryan-empire-military/]

With everything else in the game, I think it should be a simple decision.

Really? I find it intuitive, though. Damaging a building while having units capture it is fine with me. Some people don't like the extra micro while I do. But hey. Not a big deal for me if it's changed. It doesn't affect my gameplay. I can adjust myself if everybody destroys by default. No problem.

It does create a problem with mixed groups though - the player has to unmark certain unit types (and remember to do so) for every attack.

I think he is obsessed with this idea, about Reforesting.

Somewhere I read than there's no reference about Iberian ships... There you have one, and in the article, it says is the second ship found. It's a trade ship, for a 4-5 days trip. About April there would be starting an exposition, and maybe there would be some artistic reconstruction of the full ship. http://www.lavanguardia.com/local/girona/20170101/412998512665/arqueologos-reproducen-3d-barco-ibero-cap-de-creus.html

I have an idea. Is not possible to see the number of units per resource? I think will be more easy to manage resources (Sorry for my english)

Well, this contains the main reason why I don't like this idea so much: More attention for higher outcome. There are enough excessively micromanagement dependent RTS games out there. I'd like 0 A.D. to be more the "convinient" type of RTS where the more boring/repititive tasks are automated, not so much the "hasty" kind where the faster clicking player wins (Being faster still helps ofc., it's a large army RTS in the end).