Forums
-
Welcome
-
- 5,3k
- posts
-
- 38,4k
- posts
-
- 16,5k
- posts
-
-
0 A.D.
-
- 49,9k
- posts
-
- 27,6k
- posts
-
- Missile role
- By LienRag,
-
- 47,6k
- posts
-
- 31k
- posts
-
- 43,8k
- posts
-
- 148
- posts
-
- 599
- posts
-
-
Who's Online 7 Members, 2 Anonymous, 234 Guests (See full list)
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
Maurya is too unbalanced, but the rest is interesting indeed.
-
Even for one civilization, I really don't understand the difference between most units... I get the difference between melee and missile of course, between cavalry and infantry, between spearmen (good again cavalry) and swordsmen (good again siege units), but that's basically all...
-
To rate games we currently rely on both players "agreeing" about the outcome of the game. That means whenever a rated game ends, 0ad sends a report about its outcome to a bot which is responsible for handling the ratings. Only if the reports of both players match, the game will get rated. This is necessary to prevent players from sending fake reports to manipulate their ratings. In case one of the players disconnects and doesn't come back later, we won't get a report from that player and therefore can't rate the game automatically. The best solution I've come up with so far is to inform the bot already when a rated game starts and about which players participate. Then if only a single report gets received later on, we can wait a few hours and award that player the points. I've described that in more detail in https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/issues/3951#issuecomment-62016 The non-host player loosing the connection and not being able to reconnect afterwards (no matter for what reason) is an interesting edge case I haven't thought about yet. -
Have a match history that records rated games that anyone can view and report in game[saparated by version] and the details in it are there: - Map name, type of season, population limit, win condition such and such. - Game number[Individual for each player and the global number]. - Mod used, game will be counted saparately those who use vanilla approved and those who use cheat mod(giving advantage to players). - Duration [Any games thats ends under 15 minute or lower increases the lower it gets, the suspicion of the player]. - Players involve[trust level - your idea to implement - they are the ones who will help report] and their faction played[totalled - individual faction]. - Action Per Minute or Population Per Minute. - Did the game end with surrender/quit? - Was there any vulgar comments being used - flag the match, if so censor but keep it for proof, only the mods can read it. - Score at the end[In player profile, should have average score each game and only counted are above minute 15]. - Locked behind password? However to be honest if they want to exploit rating points by doing such exploit which any games under 10 minutes or it triggers a condition(mods preference) will be flagged, might as well disable their stats and flag the account as smurf by the system, if they want to have unflag their match needs to be reviewed and need to talk it out with the mods. I don't know if my comment is out of reach in the idea or out of topic, if so my bad but I want to contribute however I can. -
It seems there are no bots at all, they all have similar power in 1v1 matches. Although they defeated Petra in my test matches, according to the user above, they are easily defeated. However, if you want to experiment, you can download any bot from here and play on large maps or larger, with unlimited population and deathmatch resources, and you can wait a bit for them to power up (although Petra doesn't wait for them). Anyway, I'm fixing early game issues for them (they are strong in the late game), so if you're still interested, you can come back and try them out.
-
