Leaderboard

I vote for removing that animation completely and replace it for some sort of health bar enhancement.

The advantage of women is they provide significantly more income than men, as women cost about half as much. I am experimenting with a build where you get about 50 women then build two barracks as the wood accumulates (that is, in excess to that required for building houses and fields), even after the barracks are complete the CC continues to produce women while both barracks pump out skirmishers which are set to woodcutting - once 800 wood has accumulated Town phase research is initiated (of course if the enemy attacks you can produce citizen-soldiers from the CC too). In principle this women-heavy start will tend to significantly out-produce a player who goes a more modest number of women and gets a single barracks. It's probably one of those things where attack timing is everything. But if you can complete the two barracks - which will be remarkably quickly considering you haven't spent a single wood on soldiers - then you can produce citizen-soldiers from 3 buildings, which will probably be enough to drive out an attack when combined with the firepower of the CC. If a player gets few women and attacks early, and the attack fails, the women-heavy player will have dramatically more income and will win. If they get few women and don't attack early they'll also lose to superior income. In order for women-light to beat women-heavy therefore *requires* effectively timed harassment which is successful in seriously hampering resource income and better still killing a lot of women. The harassment must be so successful that it completely offsets the resources lost from sending the citizen-soldiers across the map instead of having them gather - which is quite a big ask. And there are a number of ways to keep women alive, such as garrisoning them in houses or just running them around. I think 0ad early game might be kind of like Starcraft II, where players often get 1 or 2 expansions, full of workers, before investing in any fighting units, the balance of the game is such that it's possible to get a lot of workers and still fight off a rush by a player who goes military-heavy from the start, as the player with a lot of productive workers just has so much more income to work with, that the attack can be defeated due to the time lost by the attackers, crossing the map, giving the defenders time to build a big enough force to win, despite starting later. 0ad early game optimal strategy is definitely going to involve getting a lot of women before citizen-soldiers, the question is whether "a lot" is around 25 or around 50, and it'll depend on civ as well. But I suspect that this strategy where you just crank out women until you can afford a barracks, then build 2 or more barracks (while continuing to crank out women, as they are the most resource-efficient gatherer), is going to be a big one, and maybe the equilibrium strategy which is hard or impossible to beat and the most reliable way to win will just be to perform this build even if you know the opponent is doing it. For reference, at the moment in the time a man cuts 10 wood, a woman has cut 8 wood. This still leaves women at least 50% more cost-effective than men for woodcutting. Even if women only cut at half the rate of men you'd still considering getting them because they don't cost any wood. So presently women provide a huge income advantage over men.

Healing springs and fountins

@agentx: Trying out new ideas will still require knowledge of how to "read the game state/templates" and control the AI player's actionshow to fit in your idea into the current structure of the bot. For example, if you are preparing for an early mass attack with multiple barracks continually training, how to pre-set the economy to provide resources in-time.One can figure out all of this by just reading the sources, but it's probably becoming a challenge. @mimo: The compatibility issue is that JsDoc at the moment does not accept the following for-loop style: for (let id of data.ents) for (let [id, ent] of this._entities)I assume this is a new JS language feature introduced too recently for JsDoc to be already updated. At least, neither me nor any of my JS books knew of that style . If this is a problem, i may try and create a patch so the tool will accept that construct. Currently JsDoc reports a syntax error on these loops while parsing the sources. At two other points i went for a quick cut: Rewrote the API3.Template definition to not use the API3.Class({ ... }) constructor - it seems being phased out anyway. Removed the surrounding anonymous function constructs var API3 = function () { ... }(API3); from the source as they seem to have no effect but encomplicate namespace detection. I presume they are intended for closuring up global variables, but i have not seen any.At these two points, JsDoc accepts the source in its original shape but documenting it without these constructs was easier

Thats very uncomfortable: Today I readed my posts again and see that I make a translation mistake: In my description I often using "they" instead of "the AI". (Thats why you asking about how to sharing the knowledge of the AI's. -> Btw. thats a nice idea^^. ) Im very sorry about this Actually I want to speak about only one AI(singual) and not about many AI's(plural). I will give this AI the ability to remember previous games. In this way the AI can make decisions based on his experience. The bot will learn in every game, and changing his strategy if necessary.(The AI will also including some random decisions too) The experience of the AI, I want to write into a simple file on the computer of the user. Because of this I'm looking for a way to let the AI writing files. The Current state is, that I have found a dirty way to do this. (I added funcitons in "/source/simulation2/components/CCmpAIManager.cpp") I'm not happy with this solution, so if anybody have an another idea for me, pls let me know. (My problem: AI can not access "Engine.QueryInterface()") @ fabio: Thanks for the links. I hope all of you have a nice evening and night today.

Should implement a half-way feature called a "shadow ban." The offender can still play and even "send" chat, but his chats are actually muted to all players, in the game and in the lobby. Length of shadow ban can be determined by moderator or by a set of rules determined by the wfg team. In fact, I encourage the team to come up with a set of rules and guidelines for the various forms of punishments usable by the moids. Racism 1st offense, 2nd offense, last offense, etc.

There are much bigger issues for the ai to build a palisade (placement in particular). But all these points only support my comment #9:to extend mod possibilities in SP, we need more people working on the ai. Some of the needed tasks are simple, they "just" require time,

...what about reducing the time the upgrade animation takes? While units upgrade (the animatin runs), they are invulnerable, take no damage. It would reduce the micro which is needed to make own units not to aim at an upgrading enemy ...

i know yall don't think the graphical upgrade will affect performance much, but do you think maybe you could set it up so the upgraded models are only used if a general graphics setting is set to medium or high? Thing is, I already don't like 300 unit limits even tho my game lags like mad at 100, so absolutely anything that would take a bit off of that helps.

The general shapes look good. I think though that houses would not havwe the ornaments on the roofs. They make them look chinese to me. I also think the wood color is too pink.

I found some large article. about Hellenism in East and I paste about the Architecture hybrization.

for me need be have more Hellenistic, the Hellenistic is more decorated than City state style uses more capitels Corinthians, more relieves, more statues in buildings, specilly big one like CC or temples. here are a tip: the Scheme can be Greek but the Concept can be Persian and Ethnic

2) Clothing As a general rule, red color for melee unit and white color for ranged unit. There are some exceptions, but that is the general trend. Beside red and white, there are also black, yellow-orange, teal-green and purple colored cloth. *Please refer to Reference 1 and my other thread about reconstructed Han Dynasty clothing. 3) Thigh Some cavalry (Not all) wear this thing on their thigh. 4) Armour 4.1) Pectoral armour for Advanced Infantry Swordsman Advanced Infantry Spearman Advanced Infantry Crossbowman Advanced Cavalry Swordsman Advanced Cavalry Spearman Advanced Cavalry Crossbowman Osprey's artwork get the colouring wrong. The Chinese paint their armour with black lacquer, so all of their armour regardless of leather or iron, will appear black. Pectoral armour variations: 4.2) Sleeveless Armoured Vest 4.3) Heavy armour for Elite Infantry Swordsman Elite Infantry Spearman Elite Infantry Crossbowman Elite Cavalry Swordsman Elite Cavalry Spearman Elite Cavalry Crossbowman Armour with simple shoulder guard, armour with complete armoured sleeve, and armour with collar guard. 4.3) Pectoral armour for Elite Infantry Bowman Elite Horse Archer Since archer favours mobility over protection, basic and advanced archer fought unarmoured. Only the most elite archer will be moderately armoured.

Part. 2 Unit Variation The problem with Han Dynasty army is that most (or all) of its equipment are mass produced and state-provided. This is generally a good thing as it greatly reduce logistics and cost, and the army will look fairly uniform. Nevertheless, for the purpose of 0ad gameplay, it is a bad thing. Every archer and swordsman and spearman will be wearing the same cloth, armour and helmet, which is very dull and hard to tell different unit apart. A (partial) solution is to add unit variation, which I will elaborate base on different part of the body. 1) Head 1.1) Head for basic unit 1.1.1) Unarmoured Head for Basic Infantry Swordsman Basic Infantry Spearman Bun hair, leather hat and bald guy. The bun hair and leather hat are already in the mod. That bald guy is a cóng people (賨人 pronounced 'chong' instead of 'kon'), foreign (barbarian) troops employed by Han army as melee infantry (and cannon fodder). 1.1.2) Unarmoured Head for Basic Infantry Crossbowman Same with melee infantry, but no bald guy. 1.1.3) Unarmoured head for Basic Cavalry Swordsman Basic Cavalry Spearman Basic Cavalry Crossbowman Same as above, but with feathered hat. 1.2) Head for advanced unit 1.2.1) Head for Advanced Infantry Swordsman Advanced Infantry Spearman Advanced Infantry Crossbowman Leather hat, helmet with exposed bun hair, and feathered helmet. 1.2.2) Head for Advanced Cavalry Swordsman Advanced Cavalry Spearman Advanced Cavalry Crossbowman Same as above, but add feathered hat. 1.3) Head for elite unit 1.3.1) Head for Elite Infantry Swordsman Elite Infantry Spearman Elite Cavalry Swordsman Elite Cavalry Spearman Different types of helmet. 1.3.2) Head for Elite Infantry Crossbowman Elite Cavalry Crossbowman Full helmet blocks peripheral vision, which is bad for ranged unit. 1.4) Head for bow unit. Since heavy armour could potentially impede movement, archers tend to be lightly armoured. There are exceptions to this rule (such as heavy armoured samurai and cataphract), but I think Han Chinese generally favours mobility on their bowmen and horse archers. 1.4.1) Head for Basic Infantry Bowman Basic Horse Archer 1.4.2) Head for Advanced Infantry Bowman Elite Infantry Bowman 1.4.3) Head for Advanced Horse Archer Elite Horse Archer Scrapped Update: Horse *Basic horse has no decorations. Also, don't forget the design of saddle cloth too. Advanced Horse Elite Horse Reference 20: Han Dynasty Horse Terracotta