Leaderboard

Here are a couple of simple fixes that could make it a lot easier to garrison units in ships. Ships should not move when you click to garrison a unit into them. This is a cause of many headaches, where the ship was already landed on the shore and you click for another unit to go into the ship, and the ship decides to move from away from the shore where you put it. Let units garrison into the ship from a short distance away from it such as 15m. They already ungarrison like that - let them garrison the same way. edit: I have submitted a patch for this. https://code.wildfiregames.com/D665

I like the idea of being able to transfer workers to fishing and transfer them back later. A problem is that garrisoning 25 units into 5 fishing ships would be a major pain, considering the problems with garrisoning units in ships. Good players do fish, though. So I don't think fishing is something that necessarily needs a buff. A problem with fishing is the fish are a finite resource. It's not realistic because AFAIK overfishing wasn't a major problem for ancient people - they didn't have the technology or the population to overfish. And it does leave you with a fleet of deletable fishing ships after the fish are gone. A good change would be, after a fishing spot is depleted, there is a random delay and then it will regenerate.

I thought I'd suggest these changes to make fishing more attractive. Currently it's hard to fish efficiently. The gathering rate is equal or faster than berries (it depends on how far away the fish are from the dock), but only three or four fishing boats can gather at a time (plus a few more travelling to/from the dock), so it's hard to rely on them to support your whole economy. Fishing boats take time to build and after fish are exhausted, they're useless. The fishing boat's tooltip says "Fish the waters for Food. Garrison a support or infantry unit inside to boost fishing rate." I thought that was a nice idea. Military units add arrows to ships, so why can't workers add poles and nets to fishing boats? My tentative proposal is to increase the garrison limit to five units, and have each unit add +80% to the fishing boat's effective gather rate. See D657 for details. There is micro involved in garrisoning units, but since they gather twice as fast as farmers and you can have up to 15 or 20 gathering at a time, I think this should make fishing an attractive alternative to fields (until the fish run out). That in turn should make water control more important, which should lead to more interesting games. People won't have to make as many fishing ships which means they'll have fewer to delete later on. Fishing boats could also be used to transport small groups of units (no cavalry or champions), although that's dangerous since they're slow, have little health and vision, and can't fight back. Let me know what you think.

Fishing doesn't really need a buff.

I had another idea: Only men can fish. If fishing is twice as good as farming for garrisoned units, then 25 fishermen = 50 farmers = 10 fields, which is quite a lot (and that's not counting the fishing boats themselves). Good players fish, but they can't rely on fish to feed their whole economy like they can with berries or hunting. (Or am I mistaken?) That's what I'm trying to change here. Regenerative fish is a nice idea, although I'm not sure it fits with the current game, since then there should also be regenerative berries and woods (and animals)? There are other threads about this. A better fit would be having infinite fish like with infinite fields, but I'm opposed to this idea too, because the real gather rate depends on how far away the fish are, and unlike storehouses and farmsteads, the dock can't be placed closer to the fish, it's stuck on the shore. Players with fish close to the shore will then have a big advantage throughout the game rather than just until the fish is exhausted.

The idea is nice! my personal opinion is that perhaps 5 units garrisoned in a fishing boat seems too many for a couple of reasons: 1) the fishing boat is too small to accomodate 5 units in it. maybe the bonus could be raised from 80% to 100% and a garrison limit of 3 units 2) Training fishing boat often boosts food production reducing the population required to work on food 3) fishing boats have quite low hp if compared to the damage that warships can deal and perhaps having units garrisoned in a fishing boat could make loses much high.

For a long time, I've also been thinking that 0AD needs to be split in to two versions: - A classic and streamlined arcade-version, perfect for online multiplayer and people who like a simple, fast-paced game. - A much more expansive, time-consuming simulator, with endless options and a strong focus on realism, actual economy management and city building. (similar to the direction DE is taking, but even further) I believe this is the only way to satisfy most people, as they represent two very popular, but irreconcilable visions for 0AD. Trying to achieve both visions in the same game leads to mediocrity. But splitting them in two versions creates options for the optimization of both playing styles, and could make 0AD the best RTS ever made

There is a old wip patch somewhere to show only the generic name as an option.

I agree with him about the structree, specifically about the names that are shown. I think the specific names and generic names should be reversed. About the "layout" of structree, ehhh.... it doesn't look like the AoE tech tree because in 0 A.D. buildings don't unlock other buildings, like AOE does. In 0 a.d., building are unlocked by phases, so are grouped by phase. Also, too, the 'History' section and layout is dire. Should be wholly replaced. I remember seeing its layout way back in very old alpha videos. Time for an update. I did laugh out loud about how fast the game loaded and he couldn't read the tips. lmao. I think in single player there should be a 'Proceed' button show up once the map loads to 100%, so that the player can complete reading the tip if they wish. Also: TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? TSD? Had me rolling.

If you're developing a complete-information game, then using our architecture makes it logically/mathematically impossible to cheat and be undetected. 0 A.D. is not, and it is possible to cheat slightly, by getting more information than the game wants you to have, because of that.

Security through obscurity isn't very efficient for an open-source project in any case. I found the methods I linked by searching a not-very-familiar-to-me part of the codebase for 10-15 minutes. If someone would be able to find a flaw after such a small time / effort investment, then it may have sense to improve the validation, and raising awareness about potential issues helps.

A small information update. I was experimenting with different ideas for animations. And from results of those experiments I chose four that looked promising. The work progresses slowly. Idle02 is almost ready (needs several fixes). Idle03 is about 1/3 ready (I can hardly reuse any parts from other animations, ergo this one takes significantly more time than idle02). Because of time required for idles two death animations didn't receive much attention, apart from several iterations. What's next? I'll try to fix remaining issues with idle02 and post a preview during a weekend.

I think 0 a.d. need to differentiate itself from AOE more. I have proposed how to do that, and I think, "But we have citizen-soldiers!" is not what needs to be emphasized. Citizen-soldiers are controversial at best anyways.

Yeah, uh, hi. Why do you want to know this information? You guys are too friendly to a potential hacker.

0 A.D. is played on multiplayer too and it wouldn't be quite fair if one player modified his templates so that his units become really strong, would it?

Hi and welcome to the forums! 0 A.D. uses the same 'synchronized simulations' network model as Age of Empires (and probably some/many other RTS games), you can read about it here: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/131503/1500_archers_on_a_288_network_.php , the second paragraph puts it in a nutshell: So: Each game client validates the simulation state checksum, since any deviation is guaranteed to lead to issues. If they affect simulation -- you cannot by design.