Leaderboard

Being new to this, I would really like how 0 A.D.'s current gameplay pattern sort of looks like. I recently got a comment from Youtube arguing that the game is just "Build an army, then send them to fight". Now, I would go on and argue that it's not THAT empty or it's still in Alpha, but I'll just give him the benefit of the doubt. So far, the arguments I've seen are "The game is empty because..." Just eXplore and eXterminate Just populate and gather Just rush (summing up the 3 above) Use little/no strategy. And by the gameplay visions set forth in this section, I still can't see what is the envisioned gameplay pattern actually is. Can someone give me an easy-to-digest version of what the gameplay pattern should be?

I can't replicate this bug. Are you sure the healer is not simply running away from enemy fire before healing? You could put him on a stance other than Passive.

Healers apparently don't do anything unless you have them stand directly in range of injured units. If the healer is standing just out of range of an injured unit, it will not walk closer to heal it. If you ctrl+right click with the healer, it will simply walk past injured units, ignoring them. Suggestion: ctrl+right click for healers should make them stop and heal any injured allied units along the way to the destination. That way you can just select your entire army including the healers, and ctrl-click to attack towards a destination, and the healers will actually help in the fight. If a healer is idle nearby injured allied units, but out of healing range of them, it should walk forward and heal them, unless you have set the healer on hold position.

My friend has a problem, when he tries to register an account it say's "This client has insufficient permissons to remove an account". What does that mean? Need help! Don't know what to do :/

http://www.mexica.net/mexica.php https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/33q4ye/what_exactly_is_the_difference_between_nahua/ ok I founded

2vs2 guerra civil soloooyo iberos y vercingetronix maurianos uran238cz iberos y maxticantrix maurianos 2017-04-11_0003 Guerra civil.rar

There is a bug in Alpha 21, so you will have to go to the options and change a setting, click save, and then go to the language selection. This is fixed in the development version, but we didn't think it was a big enough thing to release a new version just to fix this.

There should be a victory condition, somethink like 'Conquest Civic Centers', where if player loses all Civic Centers then they lose (maybe have a 5 minute countdown after losing the last Civic Center -- they need to build a new one or die!). Their units and buildings go Gaia (and become capturable?). And then there can be a victority condition called 'Conquest Any' which you can win/lose by either Conquest Civic Centers, Conquest Structures, or Conquest Units. But yeah, the AI should have a more personality and play like a human, but there's a long way until 1.0 release and there's still a lot of time to make the AI really cool. I have faith in the guy that do it. Maybe a thread where we talk about simple ways the AI can seem more human? You give a condition, then say what the AI can do to seem human.

Siege warfare in 0 A.D. is unrealistic. Hitting walls with swords? Nope. Siege elephants? Nope. Elephants were used against troops, not fortifications. Totally destroying buildings? Nope. Attackers would damage the defenses just enough to enter, leaving the rest of the fortress intact, and would then flood troops through the hole they made. The exception to this is burning civilian buildings, but fortifications were generally not flammable. Capturing doesn't harm the garrison? Nope. Capturing should be a pitched battle between the attackers and the defenders, with the garrison as well as the attackers getting hacked to pieces or shot full of arrows. Ranged attacks harm the walls but not the garrison? Nope. It was a common tactic to use stone throwers, slings, or bows to clear defenders off the walls and make the approach easier. Siege towers just shoot arrows that damage the walls? Nope - the primary purpose of a siege tower was to allow the attackers to get onto the walls and engage the enemy in melee. Or, to allow attackers to use battering rams from lower levels of the tower. Arrows do not damage stone walls. Siege weapons are vulnerable to destruction in a quick melee raid? Nope - many were huge, heavy machines, almost fortresses in themselves. Siege rams are always advanced technology that requires city phase to make? For covered rams, perhaps, but simple uncovered siege rams were just tree trunks. Siege warfare in 0 A.D. is missing variety and tactics that were historically used. See below. Proposed revamp of siege mechanics: Non-siege units simply cannot damage buildings. They can capture all civilian buildings, but can only capture towers/forts/CCs/military colonies if the building is first damaged by siege. Elephants are not siege. Siege weapons deal a small amount of damage to buildings. The purpose of siege is not to destroy the building entirely, but to make it capturable. Say, when the building has been damaged below 90%, that is considered to be a hole in the wall which allows capture. Damaging the building beyond that does makes it a little easier to capture, but not a lot easier. Only ranged units in garrison increase the arrow count. Ranged non-siege may attack buildings. This does not damage the building, but damages ranged garrison. Ranged garrison has a bonus to armor against these attacks. Non-ranged garrison are not damaged by these attacks because they are not sticking their head up above the walls to shoot. Ranged siege has the same effect on the building garrison as ranged non-siege, except ranged siege also damages the building. When capturing, melee garrison deals their normal attack damage to all capturing units. Capturing units, in turn, deal damage to melee and ranged garrison, as well as decreasing the capture bar. Garrison units get an armor bonus against these capture attacks. Siege towers may still shoot arrows, but the arrows do not damage buildings. Instead, if a siege tower is adjacent to an enemy building, all units in the siege tower may engage in a capture attack against the building even if the building is not damaged. Siege towers can also have a secondary battering ram attack. Siege towers were incredibly tough, some weighing over 100 tons. They should therefore be almost fortresses themselves - 1000 HP and 10 hack/crush armor seem reasonable. Similar for covered siege rams and stone throwers, which could have 500 HP and 10 hack/crush armor. There should be a Phase II siege ram that is just a bare tree trunk. It is cheap (50-100 wood), and provides no protection to its own garrison, so all arrows shot at the ram damage garrison units as if they were not garrison. It cannot move without a garrison. Additional siege tactics that were historically used: Mining. Attackers would set up wetted hide tents to protect them against arrows, and try to dig underneath the enemy walls. They would support their tunnels with wooden struts, which they would remove at once when they were ready to collapse the wall. This could be implemented in 0 A.D. as a "mining crew" siege unit. It would work similar to a battering ram. A battering ram would not be effective on some very thick walls that could be taken down by mining. (There are also thinner walls built on hard ground that a battering ram could take down, but mining would not work on - the distinction is hard to put in 0 A.D.). Siege ladders. These would be a cheap, phase II siege weapon costing 50 or 100 wood, similar to a siege tower. Like a siege tower, when a siege ladder is adjacent to a building, the garrison of the siege ladder may try to capture the building as if the building were damaged. Unlike a siege tower, a siege ladder does not protect its garrison from ranged attacks or allow its garrison to shoot arrows or use battering rams. There was such a thing as a "siege ladder ship" - the Sambuca. It was not that effective, however. Pouring lots of water on the ground to make mud would stop a siege tower or covered siege ram from approaching. This water could be a very cheap "structure" that the defenders could construct in front of their fortress. The water would last a limited time. The only thing preventing the defender from constantly renewing it is the attacker's army killing the units that are pouring water. Starvation. The attackers would encamp in the fields surrounding the enemy town and try to starve them out or cut off their water supply. This was used by Sparta against Athens - the story of the Athenian Long Walls. There are various ways to implement something like this. The main problem is that 0 A.D. fields are far too small, and so can be located behind towers and fortifications. Attackers and defenders had lots of other tricks too such as using chains or ditches to obstruct the motion of approaching siege engines. 0 A.D. doesn't need all of them.

But anyway maybe we should take the ladder men from Stronghold 2 (not Crusader, or original) the ladder men are able to serve as combatants without the ladder, but with the ladder are sitting ducks. Another idea from Stronghold is units can only attack palisade walls, not stone walls. But will someone answer me on why we don't want Stronghold Crusader micromanagement? It is simpler than a lot of other RTS's (until the combat comes at least)

You want lesson in history? Because otherwise you would not ask such question. I am not talking about adding some small faction. I am talking about dozens and dozens tribes to be presented under their single name. Do you understand that no one else was able to create such artifacts from gold at the time and what is this mean. Second biggest nation at the time is this not important to you? Apsynthii Astae Beni Bessi Bisaltae Bistones Bithyni Brenae Crousi Cebrenii Coelaletae Dersaei Edones Dentheletae Digeri Dii Diobesi Dolonci Kainoi Kikones Coreli Corpili Krestones Krobyzoi Maduateni Maedi MaedoBythini Melanditae Melanophagi Nipsaei Odrysae Paeti Phrygians Pieres Sapaei Satri Sycaeboae Scyrmiadae Sintians Sithones Thyni Tilataei Tralles Tranipsae Trausi Treres Triballi and more! I am passionated but it doesn't mean I am not right that the game will be inaccurate without thracian great warriors and culture : )

Do check the modding section of the forums, most of the ideas about the mods are discussed there. Mod updates/changelogs are located on https://github.com/0ADMods Mods on the 0ADMods homepage. It is recommended that you use the SVN version of the game, aka. developer version if you want to play or test the recent copies of the mod found on Github (with SVN, you just click on the "update game button" and you will receive the latest changes commited to the game) Trac - Timeline (Something like a changelog for 0ad, good for keeping track of the recent game changes) http://trac.wildfiregames.com/timeline Recent changes and download as .zip button.