Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/08/2019 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    Formations being broken doesn't mean that they're not being used, or going to be fixed eventually. I never use them in combat, but I wouldn't give them up for the world either. The grandiose military victory parade at the end of each SP match is the cherry on the cake for me...
  2. 3 points
    So, except for the Pazyryk carpet, we have very little evidence of carpets in our period, certainly they were not common except amongst steppe horsemen. Herodotus mentions bright carpets, but they would have been extremely expensive and to be found rather inside royal palaces or superwealthy villas, certainly not in the possession of common citizens or on top of Egyptian rooftops. I therefore suggest simply the removal of carpets. If you insist, add a quilt to a scythian rider, or one single carpet at a palace entrance. But the untidy "Ptolemaic" rooftops and archery ranges etc. with marquises and carpets and whatnot are Disney's Aladdin, not antiquity. I'd love to help with design of some new buildings, just write .
  3. 2 points
    It can excuse the lack of manpower to implement the functionality.
  4. 2 points
    Having noone (who is willing) to do stuff is a valid excuse though. Which unfortunately seems to be the reality. See the stats on that fork thread. Alternatively just observe the patches on phab.
  5. 2 points
    Well, except that 0 A.D. is a FOSS game, while AoE is not. I don't think the role of an open source project is to compete for market share with commercial games. The fact that the game is FOSS is what makes all the difference, and in that respect there's no better alternative at the moment as far as I know.
  6. 2 points
    It's in https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/22043
  7. 2 points
    I saw your large document and will read it: But think of the power of this game, what it will become! Look at the Hagia Sophia model wonder - and the Hellenic structures. I mean, come on! Let us find one who can make improvements to gameplay! Let us make no more than FIVE SUGGESTIONS, battalions being one of them. Let us work within the framework of what we already have ok? There can be battalions (what I called formation-units) AND individuals at the same time. You just garrson them inside, and they get "swapped" for a batallion. I agree with your insights completely. You seem like a high-iq-individual who has a million superior ideas but so many that they are impossible to implement. Let us just suggest FIVE well thought through suggestions to the leadership-team to maximize playing experience with as FEW incisions/fixes as possible. Edit add: Having an architect who can repair buildings, trainable at academy, seems super easy to do right? Let the unit be called "Academy graduate" and he can be all kinds of things, scholar, architect, philosopher, you name it. Realistic and gives the academy true purpose! Ability to heal buildings, construct better siegecraft and fortifications, more wonders - name it! Could be 2nd request, and think how exciting it would be to create each technology and its benefit and icon and stuff here together. It could become THE civilization game.
  8. 1 point
    JUST TRY TO DESIGN ONE SINGLE BATALLION UNIT AND GIVE US TO TEST IN EDITOR, Jesus Christ pantokrator how hard can it be. Worstcase scenario, we lose design time for one 12-man phalanx unit. But if it works, we have a SOLUTION. S O L U T I O N
  9. 1 point
    @DarcReaver: @Prodigal Son is. His current task is to scrap everything from the old design document and make it usable again. He has been working on it for a few months now, because the old one was a mess, and there were a lot of outdated stuff, stuff that didn't belong etc. From what I understood at the last conference I did with Itms, we will release it publicly when he is done. I'm not in touch with @Prodigal Son, only @Itms is, so if you want more informations about the ETA or the global plan you'd have to ask either one of them. This document will be a GitBook Markdown document, where everyone can submit patches to make it evolve. As to who can review such patches, I don't know so I can't give an answer.
  10. 1 point
    Firstly, triggers of movement can just be invisible objects that the units "run into" right? Then you place some natural barriers to make sure player has to go either one or another way that you want. When a trigger is hit, something happens (popup textbox with image/dialogue/sound, or hidden units triggered into attack, or reinforcements, or part of map is revealed, or end of scenario). And then a trigger of destruction of structures, which triggers victory screen (or any of the above). Already with that there are endless possibilities. I could make the whole Indian campaign of Alexander with just those tools! But it must work, and basics of game be developed enough that campaigns do not need to be programmed twice right? Secondly, I will start by just uploading some naked untextured models in coming weeks, as max files. Just criticize as much as you want, take what is good and throw to the trash / redesign what is useless. Thanks a lot for the answers!
  11. 1 point
    While we work on improving things over the coming months moving beyond alpha phase, I have a request to make: Can we prepare a set of standard tools for campaign creation (how to set triggers, full-page-mission-intro-pages, campaign maps, pop-up text boxes with images/maps/autoplay of mp3 files) that are easy&ready to use, for those of us who like to invest a lot of work!!! but are not so good at programming – and produce a few tutorial videos? Maybe a special subforum, would be SUPER helpful! (not planning to make any campaigns before we get out of alpha stage, but we need infrastructure also for us "beginners", and need to test it! I will start to prepare artwork in photoshop and 3ds max already now though.) Ideal would be screencapture of someone doing the most essential operations, in the editor, explaining along the way.
  12. 1 point
    The more complex the map will be the more complicated triggers will be, can't really fight that. That's usual. You'll need a professional version of 3Ds Max, the student version won't do. It will breach our license, and I won't be able to commit models if you use the student version. To get textures and models, you need to either clone https://github.com/0ad/0ad.git or the SVN repository by looking at the instructions here https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/BuildInstructions You should be able to import the collada models in binaries/data/mods/public/art/meshes/structural/ You'll need to familiarize yourself with how to use props. You'll also need to learn how to bake Ambient occlusions maps (Though i can do it for you) If you upload models here you should upload the .max file for our source repository, as well as the dae files for the model. Note that the models only support one texture per mesh. Most of the textures you'll need are already done and are in binaries/data/mods/public/art/textures/skins/structural For the poly count keep it low 12 - 15k wonder 0.5k 1k small buildings 1k 2k medium buildings 2k - 5k big buildings Those are indicative, if you exceed it a bit it's okay. You shouldn't need to though. IMPORTANT you need to sign this Also you'll need to give me permission to credit you, and if so, how you want to be credited, (Nick + Name, Name, Nick)
  13. 1 point
    @DarcReaver It seems that the game is already in such an advanced stage that changing completely all the mechanics like you suggested would be more like creating a fork of the game. Not saying that it cannot be done, but you know. 0 A.D. started as a mod of AoE and has evolved for years to be an AoE-like game. This revolutionary change in the gameplay seems more like an entirely new project than just a couple of new alphas. It's like if when Microsoft was with AoE2 95% implemented somebody suggested "hey, let's make this 3D turn-based with formations" or something.
  14. 1 point
    Erh, my patches might improve stuffs a bit the whole concept remains fundamentally flawed in my opinion.
  15. 1 point
    Yeah I know. I was working on it just before it got removed. However that feature was not complete and more importantly not in a buggy usable state, and mostly leftovers of old stuff before the simulation rewrite which is why it's called simulation2 btw. Sure. But people don't read. What is the third point in the popup dialog when you open the game ? Maybe we could make it more explicit, but the idea is here. We did that, in like A19 or something, and then people started asking us in loop to bring formation back. They were reenabled after that https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP17028 What we need now is @wraitii's fixes. With them work on formations will become easier. I'm sorry you have to undergo that. A solution would be to provide a disable formation mod on modio. That's like two or three files to edit mostly; ps/trunk/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/template_unit.xml
  16. 1 point
    I don't really understand that conseguence, but let's look at them objectively. F.i. there was some code fore stamina, then the whole concept was abbandoned and removed. I am not saying to completely remove the formations concept from the game but to look at their impact on the game, despite they are a feature wanted by players and devs aswell. Soldiers on formation cause lag, and that ruins the gaming experience and perhaps induces people to cry about lag. Often soldiers in formation don't attack and that creates frustration especially in dynamic games. F.i. spear cavalry is supposed to outrun ranged cavalry but trust me, I can provide a replay in which camels outrun by A LOT spear cavalry because camels enter into running state in order to reach the right place in the formation. Not mentioning the fact that running units can dodge most of the javelins thrown at them (which may be even interesting), reason why people constantly keep to set and disrupt formations; but that is 1) boring and annoyingly clicky. 2) not realistic. I didn't go in depth, pheraps there are only few formations broken and the less problematic one may stay. Some formations could be removed and annunce their implementation in future releases in order to get things more bug proof and keep interest on the game. I can't imagine a trailer with an annunce saying "improved formations", while saying "new added formations" would be more catchy. It isn't a commercial game tho.
  17. 1 point
    [insert a comment about manipulating numbers to make them say what you want] I don't think it's a problem of willing but of being able. Like Darc Reaver is willing to improve the game but not able to make the Pathfinder like a AAA game.
  18. 1 point
    Being an open source/f2p concept doesn't really excuse the lack of functionality.
  19. 1 point
    I'd recommend using control groups (Hot keys in game). This is a bit unspecific. Do you mean to select all combat units not gathering? (I think that would be somewhat helping sometimes.) Selecting all units should definitely do exactly that IMO: Select all units
  20. 1 point
    @stanislas69, something similar... Here are some examples of grass/reed mats from Ancient Egypt and the Levant, followed by some much more recent antique traditional Tuareg grass mats from Mauritania and Mali with color, to give you an idea of how colored versions of these mats may have looked like in the past.
  21. 1 point
  22. 1 point
    We shouldn't rush to remove all carpets from the game, as the title of this thread says. Although they were definitely a status symbol (those types of carpets still are), they were definitely known as far as Greece. To what extent they were present is difficult to gage, but it's a fair assumption that they were rare. Reed mats would have been far more common, and are probably more appropriate for those Ptolemaic (and other) rooftops. The thing is that reed mats can be highly decorative (even colored) as well. The second point is that Pazyryk rug is dated to the 5th Century BC, and was already highly developed, showing strong similarity to later, and even modern carpets from the Middle East. Carpets are made from organic materials which don't preserve well at all, making it very difficult to make absolute statements about how common or not they were. The only reason the Pazyryk rug was preserved so well is because it was found frozen in ice, in Siberia! Another testimony of how widely they were traded (originally believed to be from Armenia). If the carpet was really manufactured in Armenia in 5th century BC, then those types of carpets were being woven in the Persian satrapy of Armenia, and the later Hellenistic Kingdom of Armenia as well... These carpets were woven on a crossroad between East and West... Plenty of nomadic traders around to spread them far and wide, such as the Scythians. To summarise: replacing carpets with reed mats for common structures is not a bad idea. Don't remove carpets from elite structures like palaces and temples.
  23. 1 point
    Usually it's best to do what's best for the game, not what's best for the people. Players will hate anyways... from my experience most people will forget quite quickly and adapt to the new situation. If the community breaks with the removal of a mostly useless feature there's something wrong anyways. I still remember the outcries when we removed the IS3 tank from the Soviet faction.... Hilarious. The thing was so broken and unrealistic (there wasn't even an IS 3 in battle in WW2) and there were actually people defending that it's a perfectly balanced tank.
  24. 1 point
    Thank you for helping me you solved my problem!
  25. 1 point
    On the other topics well I'd like to see more activity on formations and stuff. But I'm too stupid to figure these things so I'm focusing on least interesting stuff for the game. Programming wise there is four big things on my list this year. #3488 Which allows to use visible garrisoning and to restrict certain units at certain place for instance Garrisoning a catapult on a wall would put a little catapult on top. Percentage of chance I might do it 15% It requires UI changes and I suck at it, because it also affects gameplay and stuff D557 #657 To place rally points or markers to show unit destination a bit like StarCraft. This is a cool feature I think. Was in a good state but still broken because of patrolling and other stuff Percentage of chance I might do it 15% Percentage done 60% (Needs a rebase and a few other stuff) Ambient sounds. This I really think will improve the game. Currently you can't play windsounds for mountains in a specific area and that sucks. Walking sounds would be nice but they need to be less annoying. Currently they are awful if you enable them. Percentage of chance I might do it 25% Percentage done 0% Building sockets. Allowing you to place building on top of each other (For instance mines) could also be settlements or special areas. Percentage of chance I might do it 25% Percentage done 0% And then there is all the rest, all my other patches art review getting every art of this forum in the game and trust me there is a lot of wasted stuff there such as Micket models but they need animations and good ones. Also all the mods Aristeia Terra Magna Milleniumad Trinketos's 'mod Ponies Ascendant and finally my own mod I need to make to improve my stagnant skills. Btw need to go so much things to do right now .
  26. 1 point
    imho formations could be temporarly hidden from the UI as they predominantly cause lag, bugs and balance issues.
  27. 1 point
    "Maybe we should try harder to get things done, together?" ( —Alexander the Great, 334 BC) Anyway I am going to circumvent gameplay issues until multiplayer can be "fixed" by helping out as much as I can here, and create custom historical campaigns that have real history and no manspam-train. An easy interim fix to the manspam-train btw could be increasing wall strength dramatically; that way players would have to come with larger armies and siege equipment. Siege engine range would have to be balanced, though.
  28. 1 point
  29. 1 point
    By this picture: The bottom curve of edge is the same direction as the top one. I think the bottom edge should be like this:
  30. 1 point
  31. 1 point
  32. 1 point
    Hi @Pixma! As I said on Discord, #ifdef isn't needed if you use adapters. And vice versa. I know only few low-level libraries for that kind of things. The problem of abstractions (of libraries that I know), is that they mostly have only core things and sometimes visible performance differences. If you want to use some specific stuff (e.g. we use post-processing only if the render to texture is supported by driver), we need to modify the third-party library or do an ugly workaround. So if a library that fits in our requirements doesn't exist, then the adapter model is the best for us, I think. In that case we don't need many APIs. I'd prefer to support only OpenGL and Vulkan, it means less duplication of shader code and more compatible things (like many GLSL > SPIR-V translators). Why the performance is important? Because we support old machines (e.g. with GL 1 & 2), and it means we may don't notice some performance difference, that can be noticeable on slower machines.
  33. 1 point
    I think implementing a Vulcan backend is a good idea, and it could support windows, linux and OSX (through MoltenVK). I'm not extremely up to date on the details of the renderer, but in principle we will need to keep an OGL renderer too so that older hardware is supported. My main question is if there are libraries that could allow us to implement a single low-ish level renderer and that takes care of switching to OGL, Vulkan, Metal or DX.
  34. 1 point
    Hello, and welcome to the forums. Thanks for your interest in working on the renderer of our game. You should get in touch with @wraitii and @vladislavbelov for those matters they will be the ones that may be able to guide you if you proceed. @aeonios might want to add his piece to the puzzle too. Thanks for your interest.
  35. 1 point
    Hi everyone!! i m updating on the progress: Thanks @stanislas69 and @(-_-) for the valuable tips: i fix the typo error and i moved all the stuff out of guiinterface.js so to don t create problems. What i achieved is this: See Image Uploaded: A full working prototype of a female citizen who can work and earn money for the job done, the wealth is showed in the progress bar on top of her health bar Every time she work and gather some resources: metal, wood, stone or food, she earn some amount of money. depending of her <EntityFinance> template: i use <EarningRate> to specify the rate of earning and <WalletCapacities> to specify the max amount of money she can store Of course she can spend as well, i will now try to update the GUI of money resource for the unit and after i will develop a economy model where unit can earn and spend , this is my draft idea so far: Splitting the civilian from the military we can focus just on civilian as a main actors of our economy. We can split the Economy Entities in: Slave, Citizen, Food Vendor, Artist, Dealers(Shops), Trader(Market , implementing that already exists), Nobles and the State Every actor has a degree of importance in the Economy Model and from slave can evolve in all different entities: Slave work for free and consume just some food the only owner is the State which account for the food and benefits of the resources gathered Citizen the can earn and spend; they consume food and also other commodities like textile or wine, they can buy food from the State or from Food vendors, and the other commodities from the shops or in the market, the own the money earned but also the State own them: all resources gathered go to State which pay them producing money from free Shops, Market, Circus are instead Structures which spend money to buy resources from State and resell them to Citizens offering different products from clothes exotic food entreatment etc..also they need to pay a tax for each transaction to State Nobles instead they can own Slave and earn a percent for all the Lifecycles of them economy once they upgrade in the different economy entity described above. They Spend money for very expensive commodities and they influence the civ evolution like giving some very good benefits to win the game( not sure yet which one ) All the Prices of the different commodities and resources are set by a PriceManager Component, which will calculate the demand and offer every tot amount of time, to give realism of the Economy Model Also The State has the Capacity to apply Tax to all the transaction and also a Tax to all entities once passed a certain amount of Time This is a draft for the first two State: Ownership: Own Spend : Money / Technology, Weapon, Diplomacy, Super Unit, Corruption etc.. Earn : Money/ VAT Tax, Monthly Tax, Resources, Villas, Castles Consume: None Produce: Money, Slaves, Market Building Dedicated Building: Civ Center Slave: Ownership: State, Nobles Spend : NO Money Earn : NO Money Consume: 1 Food[fish,fruit,grain,meat]/Day Dedicated Building: No Produce: Labor   Citizen: Ownership: State, Own Spend : Money / Products and Resources Earn : Money/ Resource Gathered Consume: 2 Food [fish, fruit, grain, meat]/Day 2 Food [wine, sausage, bread, steak]/Day 1 Clothes/Week ( will be produced by some Shop or  1 Entertainment/Month Produce: Labor Dedicated Building: No Food Dealer: Ownership: Own Spend : Money / Resources, Products Earn : Money / Bread , Sausage Consume: 4 Food [fish, fruit, grain, meat]/Day 4 Food [wine, sausage, bread, steak]/Day 2 Clothes/Week 2 Entertainment/Month 1 Jewelry Produce: Sausages,Breads,Wines, Steak Dedicated Building: 1 Level : Street Vendor, 2 Level: Locand, Bakery, Butcher Clothes Dealer: Ownership: Own Spend : Money / Resources, Products Earn : Money / Clothes Consume: 4 Food [fish, fruit, grain, meat]/Day 4 Food [wine, sausage, bread, steak]/Day 2 Clothes/Week 2 Entertainment/Month 1 Jewelry Produce: Clothes Dedicated Building: 1 Level : Street Vendor, 2 Level: Clothes Shop Jewelry Dealer: Ownership: Own Spend : Money / Resources, Products Earn : Money / Jewelry Consume: 6 Food [fish, fruit, grain, meat]/Day 6 Food [wine, sausage, bread, steak]/Day 4 Clothes/Week 3 Entertainment/Month 2 Jewelry Produce: Jewelry Dedicated Building: 1 Level : Street Vendor, 2 Level: Jewelry Shop Trader: Ownership: Own Spend : Money / Resources, Products Earn : Money / Resources, Products Traded Consume: 6 Food [fish, fruit, grain, meat]/Day 6 Food [wine, sausage, bread, steak]/Day 4 Clothes/Week 3 Entertainment/Month 2 Jewelry Produce: Resources, Products Dedicated Building: 1 Level : Street Merchant, Artist: Ownership: Own Spend : Money / Resources, Products Earn : Money / Entreatment Consume: 6 Food [fish, fruit, grain, meat]/Day 6 Food [wine, sausage, bread, steak]/Day 4 Clothes/Week 3 Entertainment/Month 2 Jewelry Produce: Entreatment Dedicated Building: 1 Level : Street Vendor, 2 Level: Entreatment Building(Arena) Noble: Ownership: Own Spend : Money / Resources, Products, Slaves Earn : Money / Tax from his former Slaves Consume: 20 Food [fish, fruit, grain, meat]/Day 20 Food [wine, sausage, bread, steak]/Day 10 Clothes/Week 10 Entertainment/Month 10 Jewelry Produce: Technology Dedicated Building: 1 Level : Villa, 2 Level: Castle Please share your ideas and give me some feedback, always once i implemented further i will share all code to the community
  36. 1 point
    Happy New year's everyone, let's start off 2019 with a new version of Hyrule Conquest Moddb Download: https://www.moddb.com/mods/hyrule-conquest/downloads/hyrule-conquest-04 Zip download for those that can't use exes: https://www.dropbox.com/s/wmfo1xj5t0xc4jl/Hyrule.zip?dl=0
  37. 1 point
    Possibly, we could make the military buildings more hellenic, but keep the civilian structures Egyptian. That could be a nice divide, because the majority of the civilians were still Egyptian, but the military was Greek Styled, if not mostly Greek in manpower
  38. 0 points
    Yeah but Disabling them cause angryness confusion and sometimes even insults. Here it's more a use at your own risk kinda of way
  • Create New...