Leaderboard

This brother still be killin it, y'all. @Sundiata Acacias and African huts all up IN this bish.

@Lion.Kanzen Yeah, we have similar looking trees over here... One of our more common forest giants is the Silk Cotton Tree. It's absolutely humongous! Varieties of these are apparently also native to Latin America. It's dense... Here's a collection of personal pictures I took of the nature scenes in my surroundings and other places in Ghana:

After https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1955 that Freagarach did on my request, it will possible to have both men and women using the same template randomly. This will make it easy to create the traditional villager

This issue is being resolved via Personal Messenger. Thank you for your patience.

I realize I failed to answer here, so I will do it now. I like consistency, so we should not use diacritics nor different letter for Greek and not for old Persian for consistency's sake. As we already use american English for the game it might make sense to follow american standards. So here is my take on this: I like diacritics and flat lines and whatnot I also like that the game displays text in Greek However: I can totally understand how specific names can be confusing (eg. Kushites) The player should not be confused by the interface. So I vote for the American Library's convention. As @wowgetoffyourcellphone said, specific names could be an option. Maybe @Freagarach could submit a patch for that if she wants to. There are not many occurrences of the word so it should be easy to make it togglable https://github.com/0ad/0ad/search?l=JavaScript&q="specific+name"&type=Code https://github.com/0ad/0ad/search?l=JavaScript&q="specificname"&type=Code

> says that women dont have enough action in game > suggests replacing women with slaves, making them even more rare

I still have lots to learn when it comes to creating trees, but here are some holm oaks I made. (436 tris)

Women in 0 A.D. basically fill the function of villagers in the game, but I don't think that enough consideration has been put into how they function especially for a game that attempts to pay close attention to history. First, it is odd to have them as the primary economic unit when slaves by and large filled that role. This been mentioned before so I'll leave it there. Next, while there are exceptions such as amongst various Celtic tribes and Sparta, most societies had women restricted to household related duties such as bearing and raising children, and doing other indoor activities at least to my understanding. This comes to my main point; women shouldn't be available to a faction unless there is good precedent for them having a larger role. Of course they didn't necessarily go out to chop wood or mine, but that is an RTS abstraction that I think can still exist. Granted, I am mainly speaking from a general knowledge of women's place in the ancient world from my familiarity with Roman and Athenian societies and at that, my study on the subject has hardly been thorough. I would appreciate any thoughts on the matter: especially concerning cultures I haven't mentioned.

First I want to say that it was a great pleasure to work on this mod. I have a lot of affection and respect for this game, where many people work hard to give us some fun. 0a.d has already provided me with hours of fun and I felt compelled to give back a little of it. Were long 7 months of much work, really most people do not know how much this is laborious. You need to always have new ideas, do and redo many things, look at historical context, test, test and test, and of course, have people available to help you in this process. Tnx @Angen @Lion.Kanzen @Stan` @ValihrAnt @Feldfeld @Stockfish @wowgetoffyourcellphone. Well, this will be the last version (1.0.5) of the mod for the current version a23b. Just a version to fix something if necessary. Nothing new will be added. From now on the whole work will be focused on the a24 version, where together with @elexis we will review the mod so that if so accepted by the developers, it can be implemented to the a24. The main goal of the mod was to bring players and the community a better experience of gameplay/balance within what the game can offer in the current state of development. It is perceived by everyone that gameplay has been "stalled" for some time, so that was my focus. As I mentioned before, even though many resources are lacking due to the current state of development, it is possible to do much more with what we have now. I want to make it clear here that the changes made in the mod have always respected the main pillars and design documents (just changed what was really needed for the balancing to work). Major changes/Features - Added counter system; - General balancing of all units and buildings; - Gameplay slightly different for each civilization; - Reformulation of current techs/auras/bonuses/teambonus; - New bonuses/auras. - New buildings/units/technologies for the respective civilizations; - New upgrades to units/buildings; - New icons; - Mercenary champions units now has icons with yellow color. - Civil centre can train only women (some exceptions); - All mercenaries cost only metal; - Units promoted has no gather penalty; - Deactivated the animation of promotion (units do not take damage while celebrating); - Hero after death can not be trained again; - Dead animals lost food; - Domestic animals can fatten; - Increased number of icons available on the panel; - Women can build all buildings; - Promotion (advanced/elite rank) gives +10% health, +1 armour, +20% attack +1 capture attack, +20% loot, vision range for all soldiers. Healers gain +5 heal range and +2 heal/HP. Counter System The system I chose to work on is simple and easy to set up for casual players or pro players. Spearmen/Pikemen bonus against Cavalry/Elephant; Archer/Slinger bonus against Melee Infantry; Skirmisher bonus against Archer/Slinger; Swordsmen all-round; The same applies to Cavalry. Cavalry Spearmen bonus against Cavalry/Elephant; Cavalry Archer bonus against Melee Infantry; Cavalry Skirmisher bonus against Archer/Slinger; Cavalry Swordsmen all-round. To many changes such example: to each quarter built by a Macedonian player, gain a free pikemen. Macedonian is the only civilization that can train pikemen in village phase. Sparta is a civilization focused on melee units and the only can train champions on village phase. These and many more changes can only be seen with details in the technological tree. Please, give your feedback, this is important. The latest version is not yet downloadable by mod.io, it is waiting authorization. If you have any doubts on how to install the mod: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Modding_Guide

this is very nice terrain.

As per @snelius request, here the replay of this Alpine Mainland 4v4 today: vs. It was a long, balanced and entertaining team game. 2019-06-17_0002.zip Former remains of my city in the center, rebuild and _zoro_s base squeezed together at the top.

This was this kind of a game where situation changed so frequently that the end of the game was unpredictable. Thus I think it's worth to watch this replay. Thank you so much for the upload elexis.

Question Ficus are very prominent in Tropical zones. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_climate https://www.civilsdaily.com/natural-vegetation-of-india-tropical-evergreen-epiphytes-buttress-roots-tropical-deciduous-tropical-thorny-xerophytic-adaptations/ http://www.biologydiscussion.com/forest/5-types-of-forests-found-in-india-explained/6940 @Sundiata you live in a tropical are you've seen what it's like?

give me some time. my ageda is full. and i need download the files. probably I need finish the water supply or see if i can do this before. Theoretically is faster, but Wow still have better specs for the screenshots.

I have doubts about what today's fruits and vegetables look like against their original counterparts. https://www.sciencealert.com/fruits-vegetables-before-domestication-photos-genetically-modified-food-natural

Oooh, @wackyserious, I remember you asking for bananas...

Un sol algo parecido o una mezcla entre las imagenes del spolier Ya que el sol era importante para los Nahuas, Mayas y Incas

ah... enseñame algo que te guste visualmente cosa esa tematica.

I will do an update of the first page information

Fauna templates too.

.

.

he is more younger if you understand what I mean. he must be careful in his apreciations the next time.

Something has been working on my mind for some time, mainly because I'm not a big fan of systems based on rock-paper-scissor. The case of the overwhelming advantage of the ranged units in the recent alphas released stresses the difficulty in balancing different type of units while keeping the game history-friendly. I see often people suggesting balancing changes or different gameplay based on historical facts (or according to their understanding of the history). This makes me wonder if this is possible to satisfy people with both historical accuracy and a balanced gameplay with depth and diversity. Ideas like spearman and swordsman having distinctive efficiency against different units are themselves not very historical. Even the idea that the cavalry is the best counter against ranged infantry is itself contradicted by numerous accounts on the battlefields where the later was often used against the former. This is not a mean criticism, most of the RTS falls in these simplifications to ease the gameplay, even the Total War games. This is understandable. Age of Empire 2 has reached a very high level of gameplay mechanics with this system. Even StarCraft 2 has several aspects from rock-paper-scissor systems. However I wonder if the inclusion of battle formation could be an opportunity to innovate in the gameplay. Historically, the battlefield was unbalanced from a game point of view, mostly filled with infantrymen and this across all continents and across all the time periods. The only exception being the nomads. Therefore why not consider an unbalanced system working around battalions of infantrymen? If the gameplay is unbalanced in purpose in favor of the infantrymen, with the other type of units working as support and counter around them, it could be easier to balance. This is kinda a heretic way to think in RTS games but I throw this idea to encourage further thinking. Even for mods, not only for the vanilla. To sum it up my mind, winning an encounter could be based on obvious parameters like the quality of the infantrymen and the numbers but also on parameters strongly related to the battle formation. For example, the battalion could gives a bonus to all the units (obviously) but this bonus could varies according to the depth of the formation. Like this players should consider both the width of the formation in comparison with the enemy's formation (because it will impact how much units will hit your unit in the same time) and the depth of the formation because each additional rank will increase the bonus. Clearly this is favoring the numbers of units, so outnumbering strategies will often win. But it could be counter by flanks attacks where each units attacked by enemy's melee units while being on the sides will lose all the bonus from the formation. Which will give an interesting tactical advantage for the cavalry. Moreover, this could also be countered by ranged infantry raining their missile on the infantrymen. Not only to cause damages and kill the units but in decreasing the bonus or even causing malus for the units hit. It could even slow down the movement of the whole formation and slowing their rate of attack (DPS). It could also be counter by forcing the player to split his army and to use clever strategies to destroy quickly the army with a smaller force, see this. In my mind, the ranged units and the cavalry should work as support and counter against each other to weaken the enemy main forces (which is the infantry). For the moment, I do not know how it could include the champions cleaverly but I wanted to share my thoughts. This is could be tested in a mod maybe.

@gameboy that code will not work, nor will the previous examples you posted do either. Some are C not C++ which isn't a problem by itself, but we don't code in C anywhere, some are not cross platform, example #include <windows.h> Will only work on windows. Nobody actually needs to change the gamma in the game, you can do it using external software if you need to. Also, when posting code snippets, please use the code tools from the forums. It's unreadable otherwise. Thanks. Did a re installation fix it ?

Another guy running 0 A.D. in Raspberry Pi. It seems that tiny maps with not too many resources could run smoothly. Maybe we could even make a mod for less powerful computers. hf

lol what are the odds we'd be making the same tree at the same time Thinner foliage in the texture does make it easier to avoid visual issues with leaf planes intersecting all ugly-like, or forming impenetrable domes and such, but the trade off is well... thinner foliage lol. I am becoming increasingly convinced there is no right way to do this, everything's a balancing act between performance and visual quality

Oh man, these look a lot nicer than some of your others! They fit quite well with LordGood's. My main critique of some of your other deciduous trees is that their foliage is very thin. I imagine you partially do that for performance, but the fact still remains. I do like how tall some of your trees are. Sometimes 0 A.D.'s trees seem a tad too small.

@Bigtiger might have some stuff to show soon

got one more to polish and then an entity template to make screenie showing just what I mean, new oaks on the left, holly oaks on the right, and easily double the number of the old oaks on top perhaps wood counts should reflect the poly weight?

Great video from @ValihrAnt

fluffy north african forests

@Lion.Kanzen @wowgetoffyourcellphone Meanwhile, if you want to help me with these two icons, I appreciate it. Are rome vigile and vestae. Actors and templates. rome_infantry_vigiles.xml rome_support_healer_vestae_b.xml infantry_spearman_v.xml healer_v.xml

There should be some kind of pin/faq about that recurrent topic. https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/11223-the-role-women-play/&tab=comments#comment-184429 https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/6046-women/ https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Manual_Units#FemaleCitizen https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/List%3A_Entities%3A_Player%3A_Support#FemaleCitizen https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/952 https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/3122 [...]

I actually like the unit veterancy in 0AD. It's one of the few good incentives to keep your troopers alive in my opinion (too many people see their army as disposable/easily replaceable, which shouldn't be). I prefer a soft snowball that benefits the better player over a stalemate that turns into an hours long grind. I don't really like long battles of endurance in an RTS. I don't have any problem with long games, but I'd prefer them to evolve around strategy and tactics, and not wasted investments in upgrades and techs that don't give me any tangible advantages. People should be rewarded for keeping their army alive long enough for them to gain a credible amount of experience, and have that experience translate into kicking butt.

Women can be spammed massively, that's why they are not allowed to build all types of buildings. To reduce the snowballing effect of multiple worker units when someone reduced build times of units in some alpha years ago. This issue can be reduced by making gatherers more efficient but less spammy (i.e. doubling the training time) and put hard caps on gathering spots (one of many options). You can ofc do that, still doesn't really fix the old issue that military units doubling as resource gatherers is an issue. It has down sides in controls (if you use them to attack the enemy you need to micro a lot to get them back on track again). Also as soon as your military quits to march to the enemy you immediately start loosing resources. Just a quick math example about my point: You have 10 soldiers, each gathering 10 metal every 10 seconds. Enemy base is 60s away and also has 10 soldiers. If you march your soldiers over to the enemy you loose 6x10 = 60 metal just for walking over to the enemy. While your enemy mines 60 metal. This leads to a 120 metal difference between attacker and defender. That means three things: 1) you need to make infantry/units move quick around hte battlefield to keep the resource loss low, and you need to outmicro your opponent because he potentially has more resources for defending - which gets larger for every second the enemy is not forced to fight with all his soldiers. I.e. 30 seconds of not loosing a unit means another 30 metal difference difference that can be used to make defensive units. 2) the attacker puts a lot of risk into his rush because he needs to disrupt the enemy eco while the enemy is already ahead - and this is not by choice but by design, that's why it's an issue and there are only very few games that mix military and economic units. 3) to lower the negative effect of this you can make soldier gather rates low, to reduce the amount of resources lost when launching attacks (which is why most soldiers do not gather super fast). This makes economy snow balling harder. It's like having an exponential mathematic function. Id you take following assumption: 1) each soldier gives you a 10% bonus to your resource income (fast gathering rates) and 2) each soldier only gives a 3% bonus (slower gathering rates) 10% bonus stacking means: 10x1.1 = 1.1, 10x1.1^15 = 15 additional workers mean 41 times more res/minute. if you apply only 3% you need 10 x 1.03^48 = 48 workers instead to get 41 times more res/minute. It's a bit abstract but I hope you get my point. Right now these effects are not showing all the time because the individual gathering rates of all units are relatively slow, and you need a lot of workers anyways. If you switch those stats you'll get lots of issues though. In 0ad currently each military AND economy unit gives you a low bonus, and over the course of the game you get an exponential curve at some point if you spam enough soldiers. This can't be wiped unless you rework the way the economy works though. I've met quite a lot of people here and I haven't seen anyone being as immature, stubborn with such a toxic, griefing attitude. You're just stating nonsense that does not help anybody. Telling people that the devs should stick with the design doc - LOL. I've written a large essay around 1,5 years ago how the current "game" you love so much is completely the opposite of what's stated in the design doc. I won't list up all the points, but almost every gameplay mechanic present is nowhere even remotely related to the original vision. That's why I proposed the design doc should be revisited (and it currently is). If you enjoy the alpha - well that's completely fine. Different people enjoy different things. But expecting OTHER people who play RTS on a regular base to like it regardless is not. defending this by saying "but I have 10 other people who play the game regularely aswell kthx" is just as bad. A healthy community grows overall and if a game is good you don't have 10 guys playing but instead you have thousands. And this only happens if the game is actually good. 0 AD vanilla is mediocre at best at this point. And stating that Borg only plays god mode and sets off above all others is just random malice. Balance and game design are tightly related and you cannot change one thing without the others. Since you're not even understanding this super basic principle you've disqualified from being taken seriously by anybody in any discussion about balancing or game design. I have years experience with modding, gameplay editing and different RTS games on my belt, and have lots of friends who I tried to play 0 AD with. They all abandoned it after a couple of games because they found it boring for various reasons - and most of them are into Medieval/ancient RTS game (won't start another discussion at this point though, I think everyone knows my points by now). @Lion.Kanzen Yea buddy, if there's a more polished state I'll give my 2 cents towards the process. But until then I'll remain a bit in the shadows. Sort of busy with other stuff at the moment.

I think we would all appreciate if everybody could calm down and keep on topic (borg's mod, in fact). Further off-topic discussion may be hidden or deleted and insults could lead to temporary bans.

Put a proposal at https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/SpecificNames

@Itms, the problem is also present in the design document, e.g. https://code.wildfiregames.com/source/design/browse/master/book/gameplay/civs/seleucids.md line 13: "Dory." line 15: "thureos"

What peasants?? These guys own peasants! Well, at least some of them...

Those aren't peasants tho... Experienced Citizen soldiers should be able to stand their ground...

Exactly! What is currently needed is someone (@Itms?) to make some actual decisions; see earlier posts.