Leaderboard

Gravedigging? Btw, in svn (a17) tower range is reduced and can be upgraded via tech. Great solution, imho.

The alt+enter bug is relative to using the mod menu. If the game starts with it save the changes, then restart. You should be able to alt enter to swap between fullscreen and windowed.

Hi all. Since feature freeze for a17 is in 4 days, and normally release is a week later, I urgently ask you to install the developer version of 0ad. There are big changes in the next release, the game got huge rebalancing and new tech trees. Though scythe' balance branch (which got merged with a17) got tested lots of hours by a few players, its important that as many players as possible test the developer version before release. Before a16 this was not the case, as a result we got a buggy a16. So, please have a look at the instructions for getting the developer version: http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/BuildInstructions Thanks in advance.. Greets, z_ Linux only: Do not hesitate to ask me (via PM) if you should have problems understanding the svn installation instructions. I will guide you. Otoh, here a quick copy&paste guide for *buntu 14.04: Get build dependencies: sudo apt-get install build-essential libboost-dev libboost-filesystem-dev \ libboost-signals-dev libcurl4-gnutls-dev libenet-dev libgloox-dev \ libicu-dev libjpeg-dev libminiupnpc-dev libmozjs-24-dev libnvtt-dev \ libogg-dev libopenal-dev libpng-dev libsdl-dev libvorbis-dev \ libwxgtk3.0-dev libxcursor-dev libxml2-dev subversion zlib1g-devGet the source (may take 1,2 hours): svn co http://svn.wildfiregames.com/public/ps/trunk/ 0adBuild the stuff: cd 0ad/build/workspacessudo perl -i -pe 's/(^#elif _MSC_VER >= 1600).*/#elif defined(_MSC_VER) && _MSC_VER >= 1600/' /usr/include/mozjs-24/mozilla/NullPtr.h./update-workspaces.sh --with-system-miniupnpc --with-system-nvtt --with-system-mozjs24 -j3cd gccmake -j3Run the game: ~/0ad/binaries/system/pyrogenesis

Formations are almost broken for now. There is no formation bonus, auto-regrouping apply to every unit (female citizen, siege engines, ships...) in every case (even for economical tasks), and the buggy and slow pathfinder makes them more of a pain to use than an advantage. I'm pretty sure formations will be reactivated when the pathfinder issues will be solved, don't worry. I just miss the "scatter" formation for now, it was practical to scan the map at the end of a match. The concept was good but the implementation was weird. Basically a tech is already something that gives you an advantage at the cost of a small disadvantage (you have to pay for it). So you have to make a choice between developing the tech now, or later because your resources would be more useful in something else right now. Then there are techs that add a technological disadvantage to the technological advantage. So you have to make a choice between developing them and not developing them. Fine. But later came the pairs of technologies where a technology which has both an advantage and a disadvantage competes with an other tech that has both an advantage and a disadvantage. This is fine when one tech is the opposite of the other, like for the walls (resistance vs build time) because you just have to make one choice, and you're going to develop one of the two techs anyway. But when the other tech of the pair has advantages and disadvantages that have nothing to do with the advantages and the disadvantages of the other tech of the pair, that's very confusing. It looks like a choice within a choice within a choice. You have to make a choice between developing the first tech, right now or later, the second tech, right now or later, and none of them, and you don't really know where you're heading to. There are some tech that are mandatory to develop some others later and this is even more confusing, giving a false impression of choice when in fact you barely have it. And I don't speak about pairs with techs that are so useless for some civs that there is only one reasonable choice on the two.If at least all the pairs were like the wall tech pair, the paired tech system would be more interesting and less confusing. But techs that have nothing to do with each other shouldn't be in pairs. So I agree with the new changes on the tech tree. The game is not in its definitive state, there will still be a lot of big changes in the gameplay that will require us to tune balance changes again and again. And of course, that impacts the historic realism of the game each time. But I'm confident in the developers finding the good values between cool, well balanced gameplay and historicity on the long term.

wooh, is very good idea, fantastic work, one more thing, the docks are very resistant against ships, improved damage for boats, arrows with fire or units with distance can attack inside. or docks with less resistance and greater speed of construction would be good.

Reducing the towers range is extremely unreasonable since that's what towers are for: The higher point of projectile release enhances both, the range and velocity of the projectile on impact (at ground level). Towers SHOULD be strong at the beginning but should not get as much upgrades (especially offensive) as other units (and be weak against siege at city age) so they get less powerful (relative to other units then accessible) with the advancing game.

Some suggestions: 1) Cancel fortesses and towers number limit Never knew why the number of fortresses is limited to 10 and can't think of a good explanation. Maybe it is time to reconsider? 2) Autopause when a player leaves an MP game (as an option) When a player suddenly leaves a game, a common courtesy is to pause and wait for him for a while. Would be nice to have an option for autopause if a player left not through menu but because of a crash or connection issue. Should be unpausable from menu. 3) Do not allow warships/heavy wasrships in shallow waters Military ships in oases are a joke. If there is a way to know max depth of waters in a basin where a dock is, would be nice to disable warships/heavy warships building for depths less than some value. 4) Giving a rotary mill a functionality of a farmstead (so that workers can drop resources there) 5) Changing alert bell functionality Now, increasing the alert level is mostly useless option: normally, after an initial alert a CC and towers garrisoned with women, and this is pointless to hide citizen soldiers in houses, better to make them fight. I would suggest at least not let women to hide in towers on alert (or maybe give houses a priority to towers), so that after an alert level increase ranged inf could get there. Another idea is to replace an alert level increase feature with an independent alert for ranged troops, calling them to garrison in CC/towers/forts. 6) Remove player number tips from the map sizes control (eg make it just "Small" instead of "Small (2 players)" ) What we have now, leads to stereotypical thinking. In practice, an 'open' Medium map can be just perfect for 4 players game. This also depends on a game type: if you play 2v2 or 3v3 on a large map, this is ok; if you play all-vs-all, this can just become boring when only two stay alive. 7) "Shared" pop cap for locked teams, as an option A bit crazy, but... In 2v2, after one of the enemies is killed, it is normally won, not because it becomes 2v1, but because it eventually becomes "600v300". What if pop cap could be set per team, depending on initial number of players? 8) Disable teamchat for defeated players, so that they couldn't secretly give hints to their teammates, seeing a revealed map 9) Make foundations of health 1 (placed, but not being constructed yet) not visible to enemies

Or we could stop replying to it If someone has to go around and close all old redundant threads it takes a lot of work. If people just avoid replying if there isn't anything relevant to add it takes less work for all of us