Jump to content
Wijitmaker

Suggestions for 0 A.D.

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, elexis said:

http://releases.wildfiregames.com/stats.php is incomplete IIRC, doesn't contain sourceforge, torrents and some downloads werent captured at all IIRC, also linux distributions

So there's no (near) absolute figures? What do you think was the minimum amount of times alpha 22 and alpha 23 have been downloaded so far?

SourceForge lists about 28,274 downloads since July 2017, 

and Wikipedia also says:

Quote

Between 2010 and May 2017 the game was downloaded alone from Sourceforge.net over 1.3 million times.[30]

 

49 minutes ago, (-_-) said:

A lot of discussion around goes around the fact that there is no distinction between eco and millitary in 0AD. Not too hard to see why. There is no strategy in population growth for the most part. In AoE you have to ask questions like “am I a making a mistake making more villagers when the enemy is clearly going on the offensive soon?”. Thats not the case for 0AD. We just need to keep on that citizen soldier spam going. Doesnt matter what the opponent does, its the all purpose winning strat.

Yeah, a lot of people want common villagers to be a thing. That doesn't mean we need to throw out citizen-soldiers (at all), it just adds a layer of nuance to your population, because, as you say, there is currently "no strategy in population growth for the most part". We need a civilian aspect to compliment the military one. More than just farming women. It will make the military aspects all the more rewarding. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(I'm just going to throw out my idea of giving male citizens a "to-arms" button which consumes N resources)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sundiata said:

So there's no (near) absolute figures? What do you think was the minimum amount of times alpha 22 and alpha 23 have been downloaded so far?

I don't have more data than is in those two links either. The number of lobby accounts can be considered.

Order of magnitude being 100k per year and 1mio total seems to be covered by these conservative numbers . (So might be 2x as much now but most likely not 10x as much)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sundiata said:

This is one the things that lies at the crux of the matter. There are more than a million total downloads of 0AD and recent alpha releases are hitting hundred thousand+ downloads if I'm not mistaken... At any given time there are not more 200 people in the multiplayer lobby (if that), and I'd be surprised if more than a few thousand people play 0AD online. That means that the vast majority of players are playing Single Player against the AI... This is an important fact to keep in mind when thinking about 0AD's player base. Online players are simply way more vocal, by definition, because they're online more often, they're more active in development, on the forum and other platforms pertaining to 0AD. There is a large, silent majority, that enjoys a totally different way of playing and experiencing the game than the hectic, fast-paced (sometimes stressful) MP-games. A lot of people play games to relax (one of the reasons why the passive AI was so important) and enjoy the details. The MP dudes don't even use the zoom function... Camera is always the same angle... Laugh at the sight of players building an esthetic and organic looking town... Play at low graphic settings because frames per second are more important... Don't see anything wrong with "house-walls" or building more barracks than they have houses. Of course I'm generalizing here, and I enjoy a good MP-game myself, but MP and SP are two different worlds, and MP-concerns have gone at the expensive of the SP-experience. Many people want more variety than can be had from obsessive compulsive 30 minute clicking competitions. Normally, MP-player is a derivative from SP, but with 0AD, it's become the other way around, and that's problematic for a number of reasons, especially with regards to fleshing out the gameplay. There's also a lack of interconnectedness between the different game-mechanics, but again, Delenda Est is going a long way at creating a more harmonious and integrated whole (but that's a different discussion). 

This one made me laugh.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/2/2018 at 1:06 PM, Sundiata said:

The 4 resources thing is mostly an archaic holdover from a time when computers (and games) were a lot simpler. People today are used to playing a lot more complicated strategy games with crazy amounts of options and possibilities. I understand that 0AD isn't a city-builder, a management game or a battle simulator, and shouldn't try to be so either, BUT, that doesn't mean that we should be hesitant to think outside the box, and borrow those elements from comparable genres that might add significant value to 0AD's gameplay without betraying the original game-design, which is actually far more in-depth than the game currently is and explicitly states that 0AD shouldn't become a clicking competition, but have varied ways to attain victory. 

You should like reading this blog:

https://waywardstrategist.com/2016/11/17/what-rts-can-learn/

https://waywardstrategist.com/2015/11/23/rts-design-thought-control-of-economic-processes/

https://waywardstrategist.com/2015/10/02/why-rts-the-challenge-fun-and-benefits-of-playing-rts-games/

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2018 at 3:53 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

More powerful in what way? Be specific. :)

 

Lesser or non existent lag when you play with numerous units for example.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I like your game. But I have some suggestions.
1: the language of the Iberians is incorrect. The Basque language is not an Iberian language (in the sense of a language of the Iberian peoples). I understand that you have put it because the Iberian language does not know how to translate, but it would be better not to put any Spanish language to the Iberians so as not to make historical mistakes like this one.
2: The melee units when attacking the buildings could be do as if they were throwing torches to make it more realistic.
3: I guess you already know this, but a military tutorial to explain the things that are missing in the economic tutorial, such as borders, etc ...
4: Going back to the Iberians, I would change the design of the ibera priestess to a more historical design. We do not know anything about this, it's true, but you could approach a more realistic design by simply taking Iberian elements. You can look the Lady of Elche, it is true that we do not know exactly what it is. Most historians believe that attire corresponds to the clothes of an aristocratic woman by other excavations where that attire is documented. Others think that it is a kind of priestesses. And the least defended hypothesis is that of divinity. But you can put it as a priestess or draw on it to create a new design more realistic than the current one.
5: The texts some have historical errors or exaggerations, very understandable thing (you are not historian). What I would like there to be information on each unit later, at least to know its functions better.
6: A clearer panel of the characteristics of the military units, that is to say, that you do not have to put the course of the mouse on the shield  with the sword to see it. But the latter does not matter.

7:Pericles was an Athenian politician, but he was not a military man. So I would replace it by another Greek that were military.
This is not important, since it is historically good. But I would have put Vercingetorix with a Celtic chain mail and a helmet( protec the head is very important). It is good that you have put on a Greek armor, since it could have been obtained by foreign merchants or by steal it from a Roman. It's a matter of taste.


I'm sorry for my English, I'm not very good with languages. I wrote one that is specializing in military issues and is in the last year of the History career. One thing seems to me one of the best documented games I've seen, my congratulations, although you have to polish it. If you need help, you can count on me.

Friendly greeting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Apostar Dinero said:

: the language of the Iberians is incorrect. The Basque language is not an Iberian language (in the sense of a language of the Iberian peoples). I understand that you have put it because the Iberian language does not know how to translate, but it would be better not to put any Spanish language to the Iberians so as not to make historical mistakes like this one.

It's mainly because we don't have any historical source yet for whatever Celtic language they spoke. If you have correct translations please share.

1 hour ago, Apostar Dinero said:

The melee units when attacking the buildings could be do as if they were throwing torches to make it more realistic.

There is work in that area. Multiple attacks for units etc #2577 and #252

1 hour ago, Apostar Dinero said:

7:Pericles was an Athenian politician, but he was not a military man. So I would replace it by another Greek that were military.

Not true. He did go to war.

1 hour ago, Apostar Dinero said:

The texts some have historical errors or exaggerations, very understandable thing (you are not historian). What I would like there to be information on each unit later, at least to know its functions better

Source or it didn't happen.

1 hour ago, Apostar Dinero said:

Going back to the Iberians, I would change the design of the ibera priestess to a more historical design. We do not know anything about this, it's true, but you could approach a more realistic design by simply taking Iberian elements. You can look the Lady of Elche, it is true that we do not know exactly what it is. Most historians believe that attire corresponds to the clothes of an aristocratic woman by other excavations where that attire is documented. Others think that it is a kind of priestesses. And the least defended hypothesis is that of divinity. But you can put it as a priestess or draw on it to create a new design more realistic than the current one.

If we don't know and there is no historical backup. It will stay as is. :) The person who did the research  was thorough and one of the founders of 0AD so I'd like to see those claims backupped if you don't mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed Pericles’ wikipedia page suggests otherwise as Stan mentioned.

(I have a modification which allows units to throw torches (balls of fire actually), but it looks pretty wierd and silly without animations)

Edited by (-_-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Apostar Dinero said:

2: The melee units when attacking the buildings could be do as if they were throwing torches to make it more realistic.

Regarding torches, it also depends on what kind of building you wanna throw it ... Stone wall? stone tower? it shouldn't work , but agree to destroy something with wood and grass is a good idea

Also maybe we can add it as an upgrade for troops

1- to use torche for flammable buildings 

2- few soldiers toghether build up ram , just to destroy small buildins , this one also should not be possible for big towers or walls , but acceptable for small size buildings .. not a fortress  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe something with sapping and tunnel warfare:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_warfare#Ancient_Greece

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sape

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/history/6-great-military-mines.html

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/ancient-history/3-uses-mining-roman-sieges.html

Julius Caesar, de bello gallico, book 2, 6: "The Gallic mode of besieging is the same as that of the Belgae: when after having drawn a large number of men around the whole of the fortifications, stones have begun to be cast against the wall on all sides, and the wall has been stripped of its defenders, [then], forming a testudo, they advance to the gates and undermine the wall: which was easily effected on this occasion; for while so large a number were casting stones and darts, no one was able to maintain his position upon the wall."

Edited by Genava55

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, thanks for answering quickly, that gives me confidence about the project. I will answer in order, and thank you very much for your comments:
 Language: precisely because there are no translations, I said not to put it in any specific language. Although it may look bad compared to other civilizations that if it have language.
 Torches: I'm happy you're working. And he's right, it would be ridiculous to throw a torch at a stone fortress.
 Pericles: It's true that he went to war, but I've always considered him a politician, maybe because of classic historiography.
Source: what I was referring to were not concrete facts, it is also true that being in the career of history have made us distrust of the source and the historiography. Example: it's an exaggeration that you talk about Toledo steel. The Iberians were known to be great craftsmen with metal, but there is no relationship with Toledo steel. The Toledo steel is so good because it is the mixture of Christian techniques with Muslim (DUEÑAS BERAIZ, Germán). Of course, there is a relationship that is the good quality of metal in the Iberian Peninsula(German Dueñas Beraiz and Fernando Quesada Sanz), but the technique was fundamental.

Priestess: I will pass the documentation that talks about these hypotheses and about the Iberian religion, although very little is known. I will have to go back to look for it because the read to prepare the asginatura of archeology of Spain. The documentation I will give will be in Spanish, I hope it is not an inconvenience.

I hope no one has been offended, I have said everything with good intentions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/16/2018 at 7:33 PM, Apostar Dinero said:

Language: precisely because there are no translations, I said not to put it in any specific language. Although it may look bad compared to other civilizations that if it have language.

I'd rather leave them as is. My point is that Basque is a language that hasn't evolved and that has no common roots with any other language and probably hasn't changed much for 2000 years it's a good choice even though it doesn't represent the whole celtiberian civilization it still represents a small part which is better than nothing IMHO. I totally understand your point though.

On 9/16/2018 at 7:33 PM, Apostar Dinero said:

Source: what I was referring to were not concrete facts, it is also true that being in the career of history have made us distrust of the source and the historiography. Example: it's an exaggeration that you talk about Toledo steel. The Iberians were known to be great craftsmen with metal, but there is no relationship with Toledo steel. The Toledo steel is so good because it is the mixture of Christian techniques with Muslim (DUEÑAS BERAIZ, Germán). Of course, there is a relationship that is the good quality of metal in the Iberian Peninsula(German Dueñas Beraiz and Fernando Quesada Sanz), but the technique was fundamental.

Sure feel free to give a better name for that technology. Maybe @wowgetoffyourcellphone will have some ideas too.

On 9/16/2018 at 7:33 PM, Apostar Dinero said:

Priestess: I will pass the documentation that talks about these hypotheses and about the Iberian religion, although very little is known. I will have to go back to look for it because the read to prepare the asginatura of archeology of Spain. The documentation I will give will be in Spanish, I hope it is not an inconvenience.

If there is a reasonable doubt we will see.

Sorry for the long reply time I forgot.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said in a previous thread, there is a hypothesis that Basque and Iberian languages are related. Basque has known some evolution to unify the dialects in one language. But the structure of the language and the etymological roots are definitely pre-indo-european. I think it is an acceptable compromise for the game to use it for the Iberians. And anyway, the Celtiberians had a different culture with a different language. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Formations in 0 AD are amazing, however i have two suggestions that aren't far fetched and would greatly improve the game.

1. Units in different formations cannot move in separate formations.

If I want to have my cavalry form a wedge, and my infantry form a phalanx, that's fine. But the problem occurs when i want to move them both in their formations. If i try to move them, they either just assume the no formation position, or they mix into a formation that includes both units (eg: closed order, forced march, etc) I should be able to have my infantry in a different formation than my cavalry, and move them both at the same time

2. Line formation

One of the common formations used by the Romans, Macedonians, and other civilizations during that time period, was the line formation, this formation was just a long horizontal line of soldier, meant to intimidate and/or circle and entrap the enemy. This is currently not a formation in the game, but it would be great if it could be. I realize that any size-able army's line would be much to long to have any use, so each line of units is 50 units long, this is still very long and enough to circle and trap an enemy, while not completely hindering the use of this formation. if all 50 spots are filled in the first line, it makes a second line, and so on.

I really think that these mechanics would greatly improve the game and would love for them to be implemented.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jaxxkxx said:

2. Line formation

One of the common formations used by the Romans, Macedonians, and other civilizations during that time period, was the line formation, this formation was just a long horizontal line of soldier, meant to intimidate and/or circle and entrap the enemy. This is currently not a formation in the game, but it would be great if it could be. I realize that any size-able army's line would be much to long to have any use, so each line of units is 50 units long, this is still very long and enough to circle and trap an enemy, while not completely hindering the use of this formation. if all 50 spots are filled in the first line, it makes a second line, and so on.

I really think that these mechanics would greatly improve the game and would love for them to be implemented.

You could use the hotkey "freehand position".

Right Drag: With units selected: when the mouse is released, the units will spread out on your drawn line. Same modification options like normal move command.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OptimusShepard said:

You could use the hotkey "freehand position".

Right Drag: With units selected: when the mouse is released, the units will spread out on your drawn line. Same modification options like normal move command.

Thanks, but that's more of a side suggestion, very helpful advice though!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/16/2018 at 6:49 PM, Genava55 said:

Maybe something with sapping and tunnel warfare:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_warfare#Ancient_Greece

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sape

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/history/6-great-military-mines.html

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/ancient-history/3-uses-mining-roman-sieges.html

Julius Caesar, de bello gallico, book 2, 6: "The Gallic mode of besieging is the same as that of the Belgae: when after having drawn a large number of men around the whole of the fortifications, stones have begun to be cast against the wall on all sides, and the wall has been stripped of its defenders, [then], forming a testudo, they advance to the gates and undermine the wall: which was easily effected on this occasion; for while so large a number were casting stones and darts, no one was able to maintain his position upon the wall."

image.thumb.png.5c96f96d7f741884c2ed9071c83f9555.pngimage.thumb.png.c568175e3dcba625381edc474f39c8b8.png

image.thumb.png.1d4f9b35ce5a1e84e3ad4fd6ba48ac01.pngimage.thumb.png.64015c1136d4c4af93b17e45bf4f747f.pngimage.thumb.png.10ee658201659bf65bf248033e035c90.png

https://www.fpri.org/article/2015/04/fighting-under-the-earth-the-history-of-tunneling-in-warfare/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2018 at 3:03 PM, Genava55 said:

Why not using heroes or even officers (like Delenda Est) to give the ability to set up a "tunnel" against a building? It could be something with a loading bar before to start or/and something you need to "build" with your men.

As officer it could be a Primus Pilus centurion or a Tribunus Militum for the Romans, a Syntagmatarch for the Hellenes, a Corionos for the Celts etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Genava55 said:

Why not using heroes or even officers (like Delenda Est) to give the ability to set up a "tunnel" against a building? It could be something with a loading bar before to start or/and something you need to "build" with your men.

As officer it could be a Primus Pilus centurion or a Tribunus Militum for the Romans, a Syntagmatarch for the Hellenes, a Corionos for the Celts etc.

Yeah, it would be nice to have minor hero officers, would also be cool if killing heroes/officers gave you a classic "the enemy general is dead" notification, as rn hard to tell when you killed an enemy hero.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Imperator Ferrum Princeps I said:

Yeah, it would be nice to have minor hero officers, would also be cool if killing heroes/officers gave you a classic "the enemy general is dead" notification, as rn hard to tell when you killed an enemy hero.

If any mod out there wants to use this feature.

Spoiler

Index: binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Damage.js
===================================================================
--- binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Damage.js	(revision 21899)
+++ binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Damage.js	(working copy)
@@ -288,6 +288,18 @@
 	let cmpAttackerOwnership = Engine.QueryInterface(attacker, IID_Ownership);
 	let atkOwner = cmpAttackerOwnership && cmpAttackerOwnership.GetOwner() != INVALID_PLAYER ? cmpAttackerOwnership.GetOwner() : attackerOwner;
 
+	let cmpIdentity = Engine.QueryInterface(target, IID_Identity);
+	if (cmpIdentity.HasClass("Hero"))
+	{
+		// can make a new notification too I suppose.
+		Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_GuiInterface).AddTimeNotification({
+			"message": markForTranslation("Well, your hero is dead.."),
+			"players": [atkOwner],
+			"translateMessage": true
+		});
+		//PlaySound("attacked", target); if you want some dramatic sound.
+	}
+
 	// Add to killer statistics.
 	let cmpKillerPlayerStatisticsTracker = QueryPlayerIDInterface(atkOwner, IID_StatisticsTracker);
 	if (cmpKillerPlayerStatisticsTracker)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×