Leaderboard

Here is a draft of a Facebook banner video: Let me know if you've got any further ideas to improve it. Keep in mind Vimeo is upscaling the video, which is why the quality looks poor. --Brynn

I plan to do some. Haven't started yet.

These aren't finalized by any means, just showing some texture variation so far. One easy way to show ethnicity would be to give the Nubians the ochre hair and the Meroites black hair. Swordsman+Pikeman = Meroitic. Archer and Spearman = Nubian. Leave the leopard print stuff to the Nubians and go linen for the Meroites?

Apedemak Temple Guard's lion garb?

Some thoughts on ships: I think ships should be treated more like naval buildings rather than naval units. In other words, they should be more rare, not interfere with regular unit training by having build limits instead of using population, they should train units, and they should be able to be captured. I think that would result in ships better supporting land battles and in more fun and manageable naval battles. Build limits rather than population (Featured in AoE3) It's annoying to build up an army only to have to delete units in order to build ships to reach the enemy. The computer player isn't too good at this. If you attack the computer player and manage to destroy the enemy ships while keeping the computer busy training troops, then the AI player won't have the population room to train any boats. On the other hand, if you let the computer player build unlimited ships, it will often build so many that the land population is handicapped. This excess of ships more often than not will get clumped up and the AI will block itself it in. This prevents naval trading with allies and traps the ships near the dock that have the units the AI wanted to use in an attack. Training units (Featured in AoE3) I think we might already do this to a limited degree, but I think it might be nice to expand it. This prevents shuffling as many units back and forth. This is particularly valuable during exploration as you wouldn't have a smaller and smaller force as you left units behind to build on each island. The reinforcements provided at a battle would help with offensive attacks as attacking over water gives the defender enormous advantages. It wouldn't be too powerful, since there would be build limits on the ships. There wouldn't be enough ships to train large armies, but just enough to keep an attack going. Units trained from ships should have a longer train time than ones trained at buildings. Capturing The current arrow attack would remain, but an additional capture attack (accessed by holding CTRL) would be available that only works on other ships. It would move your ship next to the other ship (like load/unload) and your boat would attempt to capture the other ship. The other ship could fight, attempt to capture you, or flee. If the other ship tried to flee, you would have to trap the ship in order to try to convert. Once a ship is converted, the units inside convert too. (Heroes would be an exception. The hero would be removed and the original player could ransom the hero. (Basically, just repurchased as if the hero had been killed.) A tech like heresy in AoK could be researched to prevent conversion of units, but the ships themselves could still be captured. Garrisoning units would affect capturing in the same ways is it does for buildings currently. Unmanned ships would be especially vulnerable to conversion, while fully manned ships would be nearly impossible to capture unless the ship was heavily damaged.

Aristeia have some Egyptian shields.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone Looking fantastic! Yes please Kushite (Meroitic/late-Napatan) heroes can have an entire leopard pelt draped over the shoulder though, not unlike the priest. Underneath will have a linen/cotton garment, either to their ankles or their knees. But I will try to illustrate the heroes more clearly later on. Amun temple guard could also have a leopard print "Egyptian" shield. For the pikemen, I was thinking they should have those same Egyptian shaped shields. New Kingdom Egyptian spearmen fought in phalanx, so it would be quite appropriate for a pike unit. I was out of town so couldn't get much done on a post about shields, but I'll get it done as soon as I can. As you've possible guessed, I still have a lot of posts prepared about various subjects, full of references and ideas, that need to be posted as soon as I can. Especially since LordGood has basically already finished the architecture set, and the work you guys are doing with the units is really good stuff! I can barely keep up with you people But you're all making very intuitive use of the references which really pleases me very much @av93 @stanislas69 @wowgetoffyourcellphone I'm wondering if I'm not the only that's not a total fan of the clubs. I'm sure they would have still been around to some extent, but it just feels like such an irrelevant weapon in the iron age setting of the game that I don't think it's necessary.. I think the mace would be more fitting.

BTW there are several svn GUI available on Linux my fav is kdesvn almost the same functionality as TortoiseSVN on Windows though it is not integrated into the desktop. Enjoy the Choice

@stanislas69 Oooooh, coool! They all look good. The third one on the top row would be really nice for one of the heroes. It looks like the ceremonial examples for Kings and Queens, used for the ritual execution of prisoners. The last one on the second row, and the last one on the third row (the flat black and white ones), would be really cool for other units, perhaps Nuba mercs? They look more functional. Maybe they could have a little more length, to give them more reach in an actual combat situation, as opposed to a ritual execution tool.

@Sundiata Pick those you want

Yep and it will be fixed in A23

2- Persian is a civ cavalry, like Mauryan is a civ for Elephants... Romans aren't civ of cavalry or the Greek cities...please don't compare a fantasy game with this. 3-yeah there have sense. But you need substitute they for women or slaves. 4 I need put clear dismounted or mounting a unit is a feature from the game than from the mod, because you need code then you need programming this with properly animation, animation that isn't exist yet, you see the problem. I like the feature but not for economic, remember is abstracting thing. No 0 A.D Total War realism. The feature is nice for Heroes and I'm testing that in another game. 5- can be nice an example. The units actually have a own space is that why some units can pass some ways or gates.

make sure you both downloaded the same version (alpha 0.0.22) version of the mod and you both have the same version of the game 0AD alpha 22 Venustas.. after you download the mod, you should go in Options -> Mod Selection -> find Delenda Est in Available Mods List and click on Enable. You will see the mod in the lower list Enabled Mods. Don't forget to press on Save Configuration before click on Start Mods. Since DE is a rich mod, you will notice for sure that the main menu background is changed and you will be sure at this point to correctly loaded the mod. This is Out of Sync proof! After that procedure, you can go in multiplayer lobby and start your own game. If you experience lag, probably the servers are bit far

(Might be a bit early, but I'd love to have this proposal on our schedule. So if someone writes a short ticket with component Maps and milestone Alpha 23 at https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ that might help with not forgetting this feature.)

It was a joke, and a way to acknowledge clearly most of the code in the script is yours. BTW, I didn't dare to keep this call: // Apply simple erosion for (let i = 0; i < 5; ++i) splashErodeMap(0.1); in my quick hack, but you can try inserting it around line 315. I feared it could interact badly with cliffs, but I may be wrong. If you want to test that and other things on the script, I have introduced: const seaRatio = 0.1; const mountRatio = 0.15; You can tune the water and rough terrain ratios in the map with them. Not fully accurate because the height map is cropped to the map size and to a round shape, but it's better than setting those levels only from height range. And of course, this rules the bumpiness of the map: var tRelief = (MAX_HEIGHT * mapSize) / 400; // 200 < reasonnable values < 800 I have too a water erosion function in my papers, but as you say, since it's impossible to have water at different levels, it's of little use, except to create dry valleys or bogs. Friendly,

Crashing the came is absolutely no problem I've retested the svn (head version, as of now) and my custom build, both crashing each time and not producing any *.dmp file. I've attached a screenshot of "%localappdata%\0ad\" as proof. BUT: I found out something different. If I start the official Alpha 22 release version, I get the error as written in the first post with the crashlog uploaded in the 5th post. But if I hit continue then, the crash handler window disappears and then reappears showing exactly the same error. If I press continue again the game starts and works flawlessly (loading and simulating maps, just everthing)! Sorry that I wasn''t coming up with the idea of ignoring errors earlier EDIT: Anyway, if I try this procedure with r19876, r19921 the current version (r20096) or my build (custom r20096), the program crashes if I try to start a game (showing the windows message "this program has stopped working"). Now I really wonder what is going on...

If you can crash the game again, it should appear there. Else that means there is something really strange going on.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone Yeah, terribly sorry the quality hasn't been that great, only really just noticed how naff it looks. Well, maybe not terrible but certainly not what I was aiming for. I had my OBS set up for Dominions4 which is definitely not as graphically intensive as 0AD. I should have that rectified for the next videos I do in the series (should be up later tonight!)

Hi everyone... Does this remind you something ? Of course, it's Caledonian Meadows shamefully hacked. I replaced here map generation with my own code, and... Maybe you can even play it... It's your fault, you all ! If you were not urging me like that... That's right. tProgress and tRough rule the noise factor attenuation. The problem is you don't need the same noise at large scale and details: you may want high but very smooth mountains, or a rather flat plain with very chaotic terrain. I think I can't deny anymore... Friendly, CalMeadowsHacked.zip

Yes, i think we all agree on reducing vision ranges. I had also an attempt already at https://code.wildfiregames.com/D76 But from these trials, i think that: - we should change ranges of range attack accordingly (except maybe for catapult, no units would have range exceeding vision at that time) - we may have to decrease a bit walkspeed, otherwise reducing their ranges will make ranged units more vulnerable And i now believe it would be much better to first start with a "cleanup patch" which would not change any values, but replace them all using relative templates: choose a basic Vision and RangedAttack Range (possibly different for Units and Structure, i don't know) and make all changes in the templates relative to it. Then we (or mods) can easily play with different settings and understand the changes, while currently everything is dispersed in tenth of templates files.

We have a ticket for it: #1306 . I tried to glance at the related code the previous time it was brought up, but didn't find how to fix this quickly enough and didn't return to it afterwards. Player assignments are managed in gui scripts (in gamesetup.js in particular), while entities initialization is performed in MapReader.cpp (see CXMLReader::ReadEntities). Map loading is obviously ha ppening after the gamesetup, but I'm not sure whether the MapReader has access to the player assignments (it has some 'LoadPlayerSettings' which goes into simulation2, which may or may not have the relevant data). This is more complicated. Our previews are arbitrary images rather than minimap-like schemas. I guess we may implement an additional optional 'schema' (or 'placements') element for maps consisting of an image and metadata (player locations on the image), which preferrable should be autogenerated by Atlas. This schema then will be displayed in the gamesetup somewhere besides the regular preview.

I think this is a must. If a skirmish player is unassigned, then the skirmish objects should go to null and disappear from the map altogether. Their abandoned/open starting position on the map would just be a nice expansion point the other players might race to claim.

was fixed in https://code.wildfiregames.com/D858

I see we've looked at the same tutorials lol

Oiled up