Leaderboard

Taking the time to commit things counts as actual work too.

First attempt:

What's the right way of doing it

Well, im impressed how fast was to update the textures, didn't even took me 10 mins to update them.

5 Shapes, this one is pelta_thrac_02: Haven't started to modify player color.

New concept art: walls city and towers

Anyone who has played in multiplayer will have noticed, the battles become skirmishes where the proyectile infantery is the protagonist. The objective of 0 A.D. Empires Ascendant is being true to history without losing in the gameplay, something they have not achieved. Im not publishing this just to complain, ido it to contribute to the improvement of the gameplay. During the game its impossible for the novice player to be able to build a balanced army, as would happen other games of the same genre, to do this will be exterminated by an endless rain of enemy proyectiles. I have been playing RTS for many years and i think that the game experience is better when we can build an army that we not only like but also actually works in multiplayer. Thats why i made this post, to help in the gaming experience. I believe the battles are more enjoyed when they last longer, when more melee infantery is used than that of proyectiles. I wont the battles to last longer, to use more melee infantery than that of proyectiles.

I'm from Ukraine

Hmm, I could see this kind of thing being better represented in the hero bonuses or auras (say, the Alexander hero might give an extra buff against Persian units for obvious historical reasons). I don't think civ specific buffs or penalties are "cheap" per se, but they need to be thought about more and a blanket one like the one in OP is probably not the way to go. Better to give it to a specific type or unit or hero or something, not the whole civ. (Everyone might be tired of me referencing Delenda Est, but here it goes), in Delenda Est, Spartiate champions get an extra bonus vs. non-Greek civs, while the Theban Sacred Band get an extra bonus vs. Greek civs. It's specific to a unit type and not a civ-wide bonus. To be honest, I might remove these bonuses, but they aren't without some kind of thought and they aren't blanket bonuses.

So, in Delenda Est, trees have no obstruction. Units (C) can walk through them. This may help with pathfinding computations (have not tested thoroughly, just anecdotal). Straggler Trees (A) can be built over and removed by structures (D). This removes the tree* and allows the player more base building freedom and removes some minor frustration with not having enough room for the player's base and walls. Forest Groves (B) have 5000 wood (comparable to a 5000 stone or metal mine), and cannot be built over. Units can still walk through them, but the Groves have an "Underbrush" aura that reduces speed, vision range, and missile range within the grove**. Regarding Renewable wood, the Groves could have the renewable feature, where they slowly regain their wood resource if left alone. While the straggler trees wouldn't do this. The Groves are an abstract, they represent a whole grove of trees and ecosphere, so their replenishment makes sense. A single tree just represents a single tree, so would make less sense to renew. * Need an extension that colors the tree Red when the structure preview is waved over it to tell the player the tree will be destroyed. ** We could extend the Grove feature further by allowing certain units or civs the ability to "garrison" in them and simulate an ambush feature. These ambush units would be ungarrisoned if the Grove reaches 50% or less wood. They'd be ungarrisonable if they were in the process of being chopped by an enemy unit.

It depends on the aura. By default they affect only their own, but there are several exceptions which affect allies or enemies instead. You can do a `grep -ir affectedplayers` inside simulation/data/auras/ to find those files. And modification do stack. +20% and +15% is 1.2×1.15=1.38, i.e. +38%, not +35%. It's called multiplication (like compound interest).

You can build any structures over (individual) trees. So, what this solves is that random trees don't screw up your base layout and prevent you from building a nice circuit of walls. The exception to this is Forest Groves, which you cannot build through (and which would make a great candidate for the renewable resource feature).

Delenda Est has (mostly) fixed this.

The game needs more of this: And less of this:

If you wanted, I could make a separate mod for balancing, based on DE's balance.

. Indeed, the upper two refs are medieval, the third one is Continental Celts and the last one is a reconstruction of an Irish ringfort from c. 500 AD. Not ideal refs

For now: Can work with the actual SVN Since this don't require the animations. Just the main mesh with the prop bones.

@Alexandermb: Here it is. If you need something, just ask. Red files are the missing ones, green files are the ones who reference the missing ones. art/variants/biped/formations/syntagma_mid.xml <- art/actors/units/macedonians/infantry_pikeman_a.xml art/actors/units/macedonians/infantry_pikeman_b.xml art/animation/biped/rider/camelry/promotion.dae <- art/variants/biped/rider/camelry/promotion.xml art/animation/biped/rider/camerly/archer_attack_right.dae <- art/variants/biped/rider/camelry/attack_ranged_archer_right.xml art/animation/biped/infantry/siege_operators/gastraphetes_attack.dae <- art/variants/biped/attack_ranged_gastraphetes_fire.xml art/animation/biped/rider/camelry/archer_attack_hip.dae <- art/variants/biped/rider/camelry/attack_ranged_archer_hip.xml art/animation/biped/infantry/spearman/attack_melee_hop_a.dae <- art/variants/biped/attack_melee_hoplite.xml art/animation/biped/rider/camelry/attack_slaughter.dae <- art/variants/biped/rider/camelry/attack_slaughter.xml

El torreon probablemente lleve como prop (adorno) unnescudo o un banner. Tambien se le puede poner color player en la parte donde esta el vigía. Ka puerta debe ser estandar asi que es el doble y un poco más de esa.

Bonuses are currently applied thusly: [base] * [proportional bonus] + [absolute bonus] Both +20% and +15% are proportional bonuses, so (at the point where a unit enters the overlap in the radius' of both auras, and assuming no other auras in effect) they are multiplied together to get a total +38% bonus, which is then cached. The caching allows the final calculation to be as above - which is relatively quick to calculate - rather than having to iterate through every aura active on the map, determine if they're in range, whether they should apply, etc... all several times a second. When a unit moves out of the radius of one of the auras, the cached proportional bonus is divided by the proportional bonus of the aura no longer in effect, and the result replaces the old cached value. Absolute bonuses work similarly, except they are added to (and subtracted from) one another, with the result cached: only recalculated when a unit passes in or out of another applicable aura. You might use an absolute bonus to add a given bonus regardless of the base stat (e.g. +5 resource carry capacity).

@s0600204 gave you a correct answer and he is a dev as you can see by the little badge. Nescio's answer is also correct. So I don't know what answer you expect but I don't think we can do much better than that unfortunately.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone I like the way your implementation work. In my opinion, this belongs into the main game. I also think the forest groves would improve the path finding performance. Especially, on maps with a lot of forest. Maybe one could even implement, that a group of forest groves becomes a "Large Forest", but you would still harvest only from forest groves. Meaning, only if you chop half of the forest grove, you can not hide units in the forest groves. However, you can still hide units in the "Large Forest". A "Large Forest" would mostly be a large obstacle in the eyes of the path finding algorithm. Therefore, it should be easier to run the algorithm. In any case, the Forest Groves make it easy to implement wood as a renewable resource, hide units and potentially improve the performance of the path finding algorithm. I would like to see those implemented in the main game.

I wonder if we could the camouflage thing from #3177 by using @Mate-86's status effects on the visibility component.

As long as you are not trolling, and being somewhat constructive it's all good

That one is straightforward (one template entry and one check in Health). Do you need it?

I just did this for the Suebi in DE. They have a militia clubman, who slowly loses health, but trains very fast. Now, if only we could have a feature to where they'd only lose health down to a certain percentage like AOE3's militia.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone that is a good solution. In my opinion, this should be implemented in the main game.

@abc1 Please don't call us clowns because your question was addressed by a Programmer through me. He believes that your example added to about 38% and not 35%.

As for the ambiguous cases, we can first compare Vercingetorix and Hannibal auras, respectively : -+20% attack and +1 capture for soldiers and siege engines. -+20% attack and +1 capture for nearby allied soldiers and siege engines. When we see them together we can obviously tell the difference, but for 0AD players that see them at different time, they could assume it do be the same, it would also make sense in term of balance. But indeed we have : "affectedPlayers": ["Ally"], in the code for Hannibal and not for Vercingetorix. But that's not all, Cleopatra's tooltip has : "+10% health for allied heroes." which is written the same way as Hannibal's but in the code it has : "affectedPlayers": ["ExclusiveMutualAlly"], which kind of hints to a difference we don't really know of. And on top of that it's unclear if in the bonuses to allies also affect you, which is not the case for teambonuses. I don't mind, but i'm almost sure you still don't know the answer.

Yeah, true, although for those cases it's specified in the tooltips. I got focused on the attack bonuses which i remembered didn't stack with others (after veerifying, some do, other not). In the end, even the cleopatra bonus can only stack with itself, right ? Worry not, i looked into the codes. I found a very ambiguous case. And still, it doesn't necessarily stay at the highest, it would only stay to the bonus that affects you, and if it combines, it doesn't necessarily combine to 35%.

If you guys really want to push the visuals further for metals without having to re-create every texture and having to bake from highpoly, you should actually implement this: This is how reflections were faked before PBR in games (and it is still used). IIRC the reason not to implement it was due to "reflections not being accurate enough" which is a bit presumptuous since this technique is actually for faking them. Making the reflected environment texture very generic and quite desaturated will work perfectly for all kinds of metals. And if you want to go even further, wraitii mentioned that the reflections could be affected by fresnel, which is basically all you need to fake the reflections in both dielectric(non-metal) and metal materials. (you could do subtle reflections on marble, vases, rooftiles, whatever) In top of that, the performance hit is very low. Here's how stuff can look with this technique: If any artist want more information this tehcnique, is a nice in-depth tutorial of faking such reflections witha more complex setup on a non-PBR renderer (despite the title) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb_Xf4SWljs Cheers!

0 a.d. have their first policemen Roman Policemen. Cant gather resources; Cant promote; Can building; Cost only 60 food and 3secs training time; Trained in cc; Limit of 6 units; Less hack armor than others spearmen; Have aura +5% gather rate for units near, range 12 or 15 (any suggestion for aura name?).

As is, there is little differentiation between the barracks and civic centre's purposes in regards to production, which both feel like military or economic production centres, and the awkward result is that the barracks becomes a means of booming in the early-game and little else. I'd like to offer thoughts on how this could be changed to better improve immersion. First, a unit trained from a barracks should have a higher experience level compared to a civic centre's unit. Suddenly instead of making more workers to bolster the economy, the player would have make a risky economic investment at best that would probably be better used for a military push. With this could perhaps come a higher experience level ceiling than is currently in game, in some respects mirroring what I believe Nescio has done for his own mod of the game. Second, it would be good if military units standing idle within a particular distance of a barracks would be able to drill, providing a trickle of experience for them. Since experience does hamper economic efficiency, this effect could perhaps be toggled on or off depending on preference. As of now, when soldiers are in a player's base, the best thing except in some situational circumstances to do is to collect resources; this option would not only provide an additional purpose to the barracks but also would add another viable strategy for using units during lapses in combat. Third, if the following things are introduced, I would strongly recommend that experience play a more decisive role in battles and the game as a whole. Granted, I only looked at a few stats, but of what I saw, the impact of one level to the next seemed nearly marginal. I could be wrong on this, yet I think that regardless, experience does not reward the player enough for being careful to keep veterans alive.

@elexis @wraitii Today, I tested the latest SVN22680 and there was an error. When I compiled it with VS2015, the error occurred: Severity Error Code LNK2019 Description unresolved external symbol public: __thiscall glooxwrapper::Jingle::Session::~Session(void) (??1Session@Jingle@glooxwrapper@@QAE@XZ) referenced in function public: virtual void __thiscall XmppClient::SendStunEndpointToHost(struct StunClient::StunEndpoint const &,class std::basic_string,class std::allocator > const &) (?SendStunEndpointToHost@XmppClient@@UAEXABUStunEndpoint@StunClient@@ABV?$basic_string@DU?$char_traits@D@std@@V?$allocator@D@2@@std@@@Z)M/pre> Project test File D:\trunk\build\workspaces\vc2015\lobby.lib(XmppClient.obj) Line 1 I used update-workspaces.bat.

All the significative numbers are not shown in tooltip, it rounds up to .1 so if you want to do your test, first you can look at the real base values in the game files (because they are rounded up too) and the other solution is to do the cheat "gift from the gods" in your tests which will have the effect to multiply the gather rate and will thus show more significative numbers (useful if you want to test bonus stacking i suppose)

I think the effective rate is more granular than what the GUI displays. The GUI rounds a lot of the figures for the benefit of the player and to keep the GUI less cluttered.

@AlexandermbWhen trying to merge the github repo and parsing it into fork AD tools, I noticed a few errors. Do you want I report them directly on the github repo or something else? I don't know if you planed to merge all, so perhaps they are not relevant.

As Stan' points out, the wonder population aura provides an absolute bonus (+10, increasing to +50 with the research of "Glorious Expansion"), not a proportional one. It it really added a +10% bonus, then one wonder would raise the population limit to 330 (or 370 after researching "Glorious Expansion"). Thus, it is proven empirically.

Well mate, if you don't trust the actual developers of the game I'm afraid there isn't much we can do.

Your balance is almost mastery.

They're useful because unlike delenda est mod, if you get rid of all your soldiers and military buildings, there's no way to fight or train troops.

By 20% and then 15% he meant that the 15% is applied after the first 20% bonus is, so on an attack value that is higher than the base one, making it give a bigger bonus and what it means that ally aura don't affect you (afaik) EDIT: in other words, the answer is no to the very first question of the thread

This is another interesting question. Alright, devs, which is it: A. +35% B. +20% and then +15% C. +15% and then +20%

Hi @roadtripping.ph You may find the command line options helpful: https://svn.wildfiregames.com/public/ps/trunk/binaries/system/readme.txt

A "call to arms" button would be cool, which arms your nearby villagers to militia. And then a "back to work" button that turns them back to villagers once the enemy has been repulsed. That would be more of a Delenda Est thing though, since core game doesn't have "Villagers" and DE does.

Spain, and yes, I play as Iberians many times