Leaderboard

Rigged the Chin Shoushe and made the 4 animations Idle Walk Death Attack Will upload the files when tested ingame whitout bugs.

The Persian texture pack is pretty neat

On topic Todo: Barracks fixes and general footprint fixes, eventual theater replacement

I'm sure you guys know the drill by now

Split it from my reply It contains the off-topic part of your reply, so no need to do some cutting and pasting or something to split up your post

Stones and branches provide weight to protect from winds and birds

oh man i need sleep

r18024 introduced those things. It was more or less decided that (according to the balance at that time) Macedonians had already enough structure so they don't get the hellenic (royal but not Royal) stoa, that Athenians will get 2 of them and Spartans will get the 3 kind. r18562 commit message: "prevents training of unexpected units in buildings introduced in r18024, lets mace trains 2 mercs in captured stoa or in their own stoa for scenario map, fixes #4011." edit: I don't say that it is the ideal thing.

Mauryans were acquainted with siege technology at the time. There's no reason to not give them a catapult.

every playable faction is getting all 3. No shortcuts.

We're already dealing with a laundry list of 37 buildings. I am doing work for the base game, let me be clear. Any benefit to modders is coincidental aside from Terra Magna, but don't mistake that for contempt, you've all proven to be quite snappy when it comes to experimenting and implementing alternative features. I'm only modelling these between job applications. If things fall off it means good things for me, and I don't want to dump a huge list of tasks on the art department.

It was mainly thought around 2012-05-16 that Mauryans wouldn't get siege engine (in fact, elephants would be their siege engines). It seems that it can be reconsidered now. Do we think of that kind of things? https://hi.wikipedia.org/wiki/अजातशत्रु_(मगध_का_राजा) (hindi version of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajatashatru) That person cite also (without refs) many such weapons: https://www.quora.com/What-were-the-siege-weapons-used-by-ancient-Indians I will try to find refs in my ancient warfare books.

Today, I tested SVN20325, and I was compiling errors. External symbol error 65 error LNK2019: public: class std: could not parse: basic_string<char, struct: std: char_traits<char>, class std:: allocator<char> glooxwrapper:: Client: > __thiscall: getID (void) "(? GetID@Client@glooxwrapper@@QAE? AV? $basic_string@DU? $char_traits@D@std@@V? $allocator@D@2@@std@@XZ), the symbol" public: virtual void __thiscall function in XmppClient: (class: SendIqChangeStateGame std: struct: basic_string<char, std:: char_traits<char>, class: std: allocator<char> & class std: > const, struct: basic_string<char, std:: char_traits<char>, class: std: const & allocator<char> >) "(? SendIqChangeStateGame@XmppClient@@UAEXABV? $basic_string@DU? $char_traits@D@std@@V? $allocator@D@2@@std@@0 @Z D:\trunk\build\workspaces\vc2013\lobby.lib (XmppCl) cited Ient.obj) test My operating system is win10 64bit, and the compiler I use is VS2013.

The time frame chosen for the game was/is 500 before, 500 after, "0 A.D.", so most of what you suggest is still possible. It was only to try and lower the work-load a bit that it was decided to split the game up into two different parts, not that e.g. Imperial Rome was deemed uninteresting As for the exact time when something was created I believe there has been some liberty taken with that already, but I would guess that leaving the Colosseum for the next part is a better choice

Have to try, in the meantime here are the files done working without gastraphetes. chin_shoushe.7z i will see wich skeleton i can reuse with wheels and balista for the chin shoushe.

Thanks, it worked, that was surprisingly easy! I never looked at the actor files before, always assuming editing visual actors is too difficult for me, however, I now learned everything is neatly subdivided; my compliments to whoever designed this! Great, I appreciate it I already tried that earlier, resulting into the structures becoming uncreatable due to errors; so ResourceDropsite.Js it is. 47. I've also moved all simulation/templates/structures/{civ}_* files to simulation/templates/structures/{civ}/* which works perfectly fine. However, Atlas fails to detect them. Which file do I have to tweak for this?

Many thanks, feneur! Now, where were we, Sundiata? We agreed that we agreed, however, we disagree on how to formulate things acceptably, right? Immediately preceding, yes; we already established including the start of the Archaic period, without pinpointing it to any year, would be appropiate for “0 A.D. Empires Ascendant”. However, I can't accept “immediately succeeding”; we actually know relatively more (although still tantalizingly little) about the 5th C A.D., when Antiquity is supposed to end and the Middle Ages are supposed to start, than we do about both the 3rd C (pre-Dominate, clearly within Antiquity) and the 8th C (pre-Carolingian, clearly within Middle Ages). Personally I'm happy with keeping 27 B.C. as the cut-off point, because life under the pax romana (with civil wars only once a generation ) is markedly different from anything preceding.

This guy's got memes. Now make a screenshot of a Choson player with 20 barracks pumping out super historically accurate "Legions."

Yes, ideally 0.A.D. ought to include the Archaic period (however, improving the game as it is right now is far more important than adding any civilizations). Again, I fully agree with you in general on this. You and I are just nitpicking on minor details. “Classicists are a nasty breed of people. They are always convinced they are right, they tend to raise problems on minor phrases although no-one else understands why, and they continue arguing for their points long after everyone else is tired of discussing and willing to accept anything.” I forgot from whom this paraphrased quote is, but I certainly agree it's applicable to me Perhaps someone could spin this off-topic discussion (starting with your post which feneur quoted earlier) off into a separate “0 A.D. timeframe” thread?

Yeah, it seems right.

@Dunedan @Imarok@ItmsUsing your patch, this error still exists at compile time.

Relevant changeset: SVN20321. I'm afraid I can't really help here, as I'm neither really familiar with C++ nor do I have Windows available for testing. If there's anything I can help with I'm glad to do so. Just a shot, but can you check what happens if you apply the patch below? diff --git a/source/lobby/glooxwrapper/glooxwrapper.h b/source/lobby/glooxwrapper/glooxwrapper.h index 6b2f33a374..b6afe2bd6d 100644 --- a/source/lobby/glooxwrapper/glooxwrapper.h +++ b/source/lobby/glooxwrapper/glooxwrapper.h @@ -394,7 +394,7 @@ namespace glooxwrapper bool connect(bool block = true); gloox::ConnectionError recv(int timeout = -1); - std::string getID(); + const std::string getID(); void send(const IQ& iq); void setTls(gloox::TLSPolicy tls);

Arthaśāstra writen under Chanakya is an interesting reading https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Arthashastra Book II

A traction trebuchet would be a real pain, and rams would be redundant with elephants

Spartan, Iberian, and Persian ranges. This is going to be the dump thread for the new building artwork.

Ready all the animations

Definitely will lol. I think if anything I will owe my entrance to those 6 years of 0AD. I found the job offer on glassdoor

@Sundiata the gate of all nations has been made by Enrique and only needs a few props. Search the art forum for it.

I think it's been pointed out an uncomfortable amount of times that there are some core issues with 0AD... As a one man army, LordGood is going a long way mediating this, including elemental aspects of a fun game of this type: building variety and logical options/choices tied to those buildings like techs and units. Lack of building diversity takes away the fun in a game longer than 20min. Adding as much as 3 new (functional) building types per civ is awesome! coders should try to keep up with this man, because he clearly has vision, and his work leaves a very noticeable impression on the game.. For example, I saw Nescio and Leper working on a way to be able to display more building slots in the GUI over here, which already solves one potential problem. I know the AI is a different beast altogether, but LordGood's and Stanislas69's progress in the modelling department merits the attention from coders. This can be a nice communal project. Has anybody asked @Alexandermb wether he's interested in contributing models for this project? Three people working on it at the same time is sure to speed up the process considerably.

Right, I forgot. So, for Spartans: Syssition: Phase 1 Perioikoi Hoplite Phase 2 Skiritai Commando Phase 3 Spartiate Champion Spartan Heroes Archery Range: Phase 1 Helot Skirmisher Phase 2 Thureophoros Heavy Skirmisher Cavalry Stables Phase 2 Perioikoi Light Cavalry Greek Allied Cavalry I guess my real point is that some civs won't need all of the military buildings Yes, I hate this. As you say, it's a mess. There were other ways to nerfing the NF rush. Better to use a Stoa much like how DE uses stoas. If you want to add extra champs and extraneous units like Thracian Black Cloaks, et al., then you can now add them to the stables, barracks, ranges respectively, either as Phase 3 options or unlock them with a special tech. In DE, I instead made this a special ability for 1 civ after 'Upgrading' individual barracks to Royal Barracks, see: Macedonians. Removed it from all others. This sounds interesting. I imagine an auto-research tech that looks for each of the required buildings. The ranged cavalry are then unlocked by that tech. That would be the way to do it without adding any new code. The other way would be player.xml.

I would defer cavalry stables to phase 2, but I don't want different civs to have different paths to the same units. That's what makes balancing hell. The effectiveness and availability of different options once all the prerequisites are met are what are going to set these civs apart. In that spirit, it may be wise to add champion buildings. I never liked how certain civs got he ability to train champions from their barracks. Should that champion building stay the fortress? maybe. who knows. this could also indirectly buff mercenaries if we decide not to have them follow these prereqs, have a civ spend a lot more money for the full experienced sleeve of troop types I would like for stables and archery ranges to be prerequisites for ranged and cavalry champions respectively though. Requiring both a stable and range for ranged cavalry should put a good dent in the current camel-cavalry archer rush epidemic we have here now. This opens up a lot of options, I will do my best to capitalize on them as I move along, but I'm going to do so from a level playing field. That means making sure everyone has everything. phase 2 champions seemed a bit messy to me, I think the stoa and town champions were added to counteract the earlier prevailing naked fanatic rushes, but i dont know

I have indeed worked on changing the more options window since it is too small on min res (screenshots are at 1366x768, so at least min height, which is the problem here mostly). Notice the problem will grow worse when we add more options to the screen. For solving that I created with some hacky code a number of options for solving that, after a some discussion and some more code the the picture below matched our taste best (ok we did say the gamedescription and the tabs should exchange position and probably the two columns also, but those are minor things): However the downside of this approach is that "< elexis> its just asking for scrolling unfortunately". Also since then study and stuff took over so my coding time was limited and the work got stalled a bit. Attaching two more proposals made: remove the more options button and make all tab button toggle the screenon that tab, the buttons in the window could ofc also be removed and stuff. Notice no duplicate buttons, but lots of clicks needed to change just 1 setting.

Do you plan to make archery range, stables, etc. for each civ? Even if not all civs need them, they'd still be good to have for mods or scenarios.

LordGood making it shine bright Lacedaemon!

have fun, kids

There has been a lot of discussion of how the meta of 0 A.D is haphazard, with typically only one strategy dominating the game. These points have merits, but while buffing and nerfing a single type of unit may seem like the best/easiest option, it seems better to look at the units in the context of which faction they are in since there should be a large difference between the functionality of a Roman Triarius to that of a Mauryan counterpart. Thus, I would like to use a single civilisation, Sparta, as a general template for this approach. The focus will basically be on the units, but the changes should affect other parts of the game. As another note, I will be using generic names to make the article more user-friendly. Please understand that my intention is not to make completely formed document but instead a base by which others can provide feedback; my hope is that some of this would see presence in the base game, but regardless, this approach should lead to a better purposed approach to both design and balance. There are limitations to this since 0 A.D. does not depict development chronologically, but my hope is that this method is a reasonable balance between the dynamics of history and gameplay. Village Phase Units: Spartan Hoplite In considering how to make Sparta, having the most prominent unit type withheld until the late game seems an absurd choice. Rather, this unit should play a central role throughout the game for Sparta. Training: Although the player would start with one Spartan, training more would require the construction of the mess hall, a building that trains heroes and provides the basis of upgrades to the Spartan units. After this structure has been completed, Spartan hoplites would be able to be trained at the Civic Centre. Spartan hoplites have long training times, which can be quickened with later technologies, but in general, this unit would be difficult to mass. Besides boasting a large defense, one of the biggest advantages would be a decently ranged aura to buff friendly mêlée infantry units' attack and defense. By researching the technology "Tyrtaean Hymns," the slow Spartan movement could be increased to allow them to better match the speeds of faster units. On the other hand, "Squires" would allow this aura to affect helots, making them significantly better at fighting. Later upgrades could make Spartans cause a fear aura, make their train time much faster, or simply buff their stats. Simply speaking, the player could have a great deal a freedom in customizing their Spartans to the needs of their game. Spartan Women: Women in the current meta are weak and vulnerable units. The same should not be said for Spartan Female units. With a faster movement speed and higher hp pool, these units should be able to better hold out against raiding until help arrives. Aside from building defensive buildings, they should offer an inspirational aura that makes helot units perform much better when fighting in their territory. Nonetheless, this makes them only support units albeit valuable ones. The only disadvantage they, like the Spartan hoplite, would suffer from is a long training time. Women would be trained at the Civic Centre only. Helots: Making up the next part of the Spartan roster, Helots should play a central but unique role that reflects their class. Helots would be strictly armed workers, wearing only the lightest equipment. Like the aforementioned units, they would only be trained at the Civic Centre but at a faster rate. When fighting alone in friendly territory, they would be mediocre at best, but outside, they would be only cannon-fodder unless Spartans with the right upgrades were nearby. In the later phases, a technology could be researched to free specific ones for a certain cost, making the freed helots significantly better in combat and lacking the penalties in neutral and enemy territory. They would benefit, as already mentioned, from the presence of specific units. Skiritae: Yes this unit would be available at the village phase and would be the only unit trainable at the barracks during this phase. It would retain all the features it currently possesses. Its main value would be as a harrassing unit at this point, but it could also be used to deal with raiding units your opponent would field. It would benefit from Spartan auras, making sending a Spartan hoplite in conjunction with a raid an excellent choice for heavier damage. In later parts of the game, this unit could see action in raids but as other units become more efficient with this function and Skiritae benefit from fighting near Spartans, their role would become one of bolstering flanks of formations. Town Phase: Periokoi: Like the Spartan hoplite, this would be a frontline unit, but despite its lacking powerful auras and the large stats of Spartan hoplites, they would be a force to be reckoned with, almost on par with standard Athenian hoplites, and potentially better if a Spartan hoplite is with them. Their gather rates would be decent, not as good as helots but better than Skiritae, but the main advantage would be the ease by which they could be massed. These would be trained at the barracks. Boetian Allied Cavalry: These units would be expensive but potentially powerful even in small numbers. Unlike the Skiritae, which are both shock and frontline troops, Allied Cavalry would only be shock troops. This would require researching Boetian Alliance, however. These cavalry would be spear cavalry and trained at the barracks for the standard cost plus some metal. Altogether, I would see this as more of a force to field if an enemy uses a mainly ranged unit composition or as a means of harassing some workers. City Phase: Spartan Pikemen: In the final phase there would be the option to reform the Spartan military, modernizing it. The results would be that Spartan hoplites would be transformed into the following unit, making their training time significantly faster while still retaining powerful stats. The aura they formerly had would be gone though, and they would be expensive to maintain in production for very long. If timed correctly though, a Spartan player could beeline to this technology, hoping to quickly overwhelm their opponents. This could be just one of a few options for how Spartan hoplites could evolve. If the player wished to maintain quality over quantity, they could research a technology that favors the aristocrats. Yet another path could be a way of getting some of both things, allowing @#&#036;% sons to be legitimized. Since each of these could favor specific unit compositions, it would allow the player to operate with that framework in mind, having build orders that could play to the different strengths. Olynthian Skirmisher Cavalry: As technologies could gradually make Boetian cavalry more purposes towards supporting Spartan phalanxes, this unit could arise as a potential trash unit as resources dwindle and raiding becomes a matter of resource efficiency. These units would be cheap due to them being levies of allies have an average training time. While they would be pretty squishy, their speed and affordability would be their selling point as resources grow scarce.

Focussing on the historical uniqueness of each civ is the perfect way of diversifying the factions. Every faction has their own character/culture/history, and using this in terms of architecture, units and technologies offers so much potential for gameplay and aesthetics.