Leaderboard

Nah, our game loads too fast to have an intro video. And having a video instead of the map-loading screen is weird.

Spoofs/satire etc are allowed, would still be nicer to do something unique if we do one though About the logo video, do you mean the one that's e.g. used at the beginning of the Alpha 16 release video: ? Or is it something else you're thinking of?

Final fortress model.

Sounds like what you want to do is what was discussed here on the forum already. I call it Hybrid AI, i.e. player takes control of one unit, the AI controls the rest. Others may call it RPG. You may call it taking leadership. What you want to achieve is what modders try to surrect anyway. Though the Roman timeframe is too rigid + limited + low a goal in my opinion. Supply lines is what also was planned. I have some frontline work done that could be used to calculate the best / safest + quickest (optimum) paths for supply lines. We want to give resources a mesh representation, units shall get a more flexible + even better visualized inventory than it already is currently (e.g. when bearing fruits, a basket is currently seen, but we want inventory to have a prop representation, then a building could have ladder attached as inventory/prop which could be grabbed by units or destroyed by enemies ... or lay around as loot when the building is destroyed. .. ). We might dream a bit much but well ... nothing is impossible. At least not in 0AD. My recommendation would be to develop the engine further, to create that Hybrid AI functionality, layout supply lines + conditional production chains, .. then the rest will follow with ease. (as most required artwork already exists, at least for your Roman setting)

Right, so I'm going to give a personal update (since I've been asked to play the balance branch) and I'm going to also give some personal thoughts. First off, I have little free time as of right now, things irl are gobbling up all the time I have, I barely have time to just play games, much less 0 AD. This means that I don't have time to figure out how to install the balance branch and even less time to do actual play-testing. This unfortunately means that you have to scratch me off the play tester list. I'm going to continue to play a few games now and then though. I'll be doing it on A16, even if it's not as good as A17, At very least I can keep in touch with the game during that time. As for the actual game itself, I have a few thoughts. I believe that the game itself needs to be broken down and rebuilt, at very least the units themselves need to. I PM'd alpha123 and he linked me a text document that explained some of the changes that were in store for the game. These changes would basically invalidate the counter-system completely, which is something I agree with. These changes also mean that we would no longer have need for multipliers. It also means that all the changes being tested would become irrelevant as well. Alpha123 is envisioning a total and complete rework of units. So trying to balance things out from the way units are right now becomes somewhat un-needed; everything is going to change anyway in the future. You can PM alpha123 for the details. I'll just leave this here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PxeSahVf5J6h32jy2iqTHlnogtQSHPocXKqNSspyMUs/edit In the mean time, I'm going to write an open document about how I believe units should be changed. I had started writing this but I don't have access to my laptop as of right now. I'm either going to try to find the document I wrote or re-write everything. E: basically the changes I would so would be the following. There are three big attributes that a unit can have: Stats (attack/HP/rate of fire) Range Speed My, very basic, idea is that units should have only two of these attributes as their strengths. No unit should have all three. For example, the way things work in the game currently, ranged units tend to have stats that are quite comparable to those of melee units. Skirm-cav have all three attributes, which is why they are broken. They have the attack, the range and the speed to make them very versatile units. Ranged infantry have good stats but they're also ranged. The attack/HP that melee infantry aren't good enough to compete with ranged units. My idea is that every unit should have two of these attributes as strengths, the last one would be a weakness. For example: Melee infantry: Stats: Lots of HP, lots of dps (hack) Range: 0 Speed: infantry Ranged infantry: Stats: Low HP, medium dps (less than melee infantry) (pierce) Range: Medium to high Speed: Infantry Melee cav: Stats: lots HP, lots of dps, higher cost to reflect that (hack) Range: 0 Speed: Cav Ranged Cav: Stats: medium HP, low dps, medium to high cost (pierce) Range: Low to medium Speed: cav You can then make a distinction between units. Spear infantry would get a mutliplier against cav, that's the most obvious and needed attribute they need. they get lower dps than swordsmen to reflect their cav mutliplier, as well. however spear men and swordsmen, if they catch ranged infantry with a melee attack, they should win. ranged infantry should have their range be their winning attribute, not their dps. e.g. ranged infantry can use their range to attack melee infantry without being attacked themselves. this attribute makes them good if they're well-positioned (at range, under the cover of a CC, behind friendly melee units, etc), but bad if they're not (caught by a flank from melee infantry, caught in the open by cav without spear men protection, etc). similarly, ranged cav should get very low dps, to reflect their speed and range. they'll become scouting and harassing units. they'll be good at picking off reinforcements, attacking harvesters, scouting, etc. however ranged cav will then be bad in straight up fights. you can also make distinctions between units themselves. e.g. archers will be medium dps but long range. skirmishers will have shorter range and medium dps. you also can give skirmishers very high attack, but low rate of fire. this means they're very good hit and run units, but they need to be micro'd to be really efficient. you can play on these attributes to make units feel and work differently. spear men could give a range of 2 or 3 meters, this allows them to be able to fight with less surface area than swordsmen for example. so swordsmen that have a good surround do well, but if they don't have good surface area, spearmen with their small range have the upper hand. ^these are the kinds of changes that make units unique. units have a role. you can do all this without multipliers (except for spear infantry vs cav units). units will feel and act differently but there are no hard-counters in the game. units well used and well positioned come out on top. you can balance a unit through stats. e.g. you can give skirm-cav just enough dps that they're good harass units without being good in fights. same for other units. this is the best way to "fix" things, imo.

There is no sele_struct yet. The dds there is a greek placeholder