Leaderboard

That. Furthermore I'm working on a patch that lets you adjust the batch size in game by scrolling with the mouse wheel.

inb4 Lordgood goes crazy : ↑ he's talking about *actual* ponies

Easy fix. Check <WallPiece>. Also, the Kushite wall gate is funky. Not aligned correctly. Not sure if that's just DE or in this mod too.

I agree with Sundata, that city building ends up often in too mechanic-practical ways. Multiplayer games escalate pretty fast, there's no time left to build a city with walls (even wooden one). I think some reasons are because of the unit system: every citizen soldiers can be used as full soldier, you don't need really walls for protection from enemy soldiers. Walls won't help much a more "peaceful" developing city anyway. Nowadays in fights you got the winning majority or you loose (even against AI). City building can have really low priority, expensive walls can be destroyed by masses of unorganized citizen soldiers in no time, without siege machine.. Houses are much cheaper, fast built, useful and don't cost too much. Don't understand me wrong, i like the concept of citizen soldiers, but it feels a bit overwhelming in some situations. (probably we could do a group of players for more roleplay focused city-building ) My wish/opinion on formations : every formation should need a minimum size of units, time to form, later the peoples are in a locked group with bonus/malus depending on unit and formation (speed, charge, defence, turtle, range, cap, .. , citizen can't gather in group but fight, .. ). This could bring in a counter-system "light" and open ways to divide citizen soldiers more into phases when they work like women without normal weapons, or fight as organized groups. Citizen only gain ability to fight effective in formations. Champions would just benefit by formations themself. Walls would gain influence, they give time to prepare citizen for an organized defence of a city. Non-combatant population could be made an important factor to increase the number of locked groups, to increase the possible amount of militarized citizen, unless you build champions. If you want big armies, you need a big city, enough ressources to afford professional soldiers or special resarch? Good idea. Now we can build dropsites and do research (faster gathering, ..), because CC alone isn't helpful over time (ressources deplete in area). Why not a similar system for to store ressources? If i want to store more food, i need some sort of ancient granary, or other storehouses for different material? (Question: can worker be made to stop gathering ressources if store full?) I would like this This thread pretty escalated to a collection of different ideas

Yes, yes, yes... This would make units behave much more logically/naturally. Right now they are all indeed berserkers, lol! This Berserker attitude often messes up my stealthy tactics, and "non-agression policy" in my early game. "But just put your units in defensive/passive/ stand ground": no thanks, those stances are 1 way ticket to getting slaughtered. I like my soldiers to defend each other no matter what, not be picked of one by one or be kited to death... But that doesn't mean they should chase uncatchable enemies across the map when I leave them alone for half a minute.. "If you don't like fighting in early game, use ceasefire": no thanks, it's very gratifying to see your enemies slaughter each-other while you try to maintain peace. Peace should be earned Yes please... A total disregard for town aesthetics is currently the way to go if you want to win a MP match. Building a town with a logical/natural layout is totally penalised right now.. In fact, experienced online players ridicule noobs for their "sim-cities".. When a logical town layout invites ridicule, that should be a red light. yes please, I'm trying to make a map according to these considerations. I like a lot of those mechanics from DE. They're much more logical/immersive. I was thinking that the CC could be programmed to only be able to store a nominal amount of each resource, like max 200 of every resource. Then the CC can still be used in very early game, or emergencies or when setting up a new territory, but the moment you want to train 5 units at a time, or build barracks, you're going to have set up storehouse and farm to store more resources. When CC is full, you'd get a message like: "CC stores are full, build a storehouse to store more resources or a farmstead to store more food" Would be so nice. We really need this, I think. Having 100% of dedicated eco units being women makes me cringe. "But, but, what about citizen soldiers?" people watch too many movies, I think... 300 was a really terrible movie people... Absolutely terrible... Really bad... Even propagandistic... Read about Helots, and realise every single civ in the game had a similar civilian plebeian population. Warrior cultures where all the men are fighters don't exist outside of hunter gatherer communities... It's a Western romanticism that doesn't have any place in a historical game, imo... Even Celts had a huge non-combatent civilian population... Uhu..

I've been wanting to bring this up for a while, but there are so many little details that could be changed, that I want discus them in a single post/list. Anyway, for now: It's really awkward that you're able to start construction on a building within range of enemy units/buildings. It's kind of an immersion breaker, and borderline cheating, in my book. Tower-creeping is so, ugh.. Basically taking advantage of a less than ideal game mechanic, I think. Both, building a tower/fortress on your enemies' border within range of your enemies' buildings/units as well as starting construction on new structures when you're base is already overrun is just, ugh... Like sending 30 guys to rebuild a destroyed CC when the enemy army is still in your base??? Ugh... Sorry for all the ughs There are many of these "micro-cheats" that take advantage of less than ideal game-mechanics and pathfinder issues, like using 1 soldier to lure an entire army in to a kill box. Or pressing the halt button every couple of seconds while in combat, so that all the soldiers are reassigned to the most nearby target (this should happen automatically). It looks horrendous to see an entire army cut to pieces because they obsessively chased a single unit, passing an entire army that's systematically cutting them down. There's a lot of this weird advantage taking. For example: Supposedly pro-players don't use walls. Nonsense! All these so called pro-players are building "house"walls" instead. What in the actual "explicative". Why would a row of houses stop an army? You just go through the backdoor, and exit through the front. Or crawl through the windows. O just kick through the wattle and daub or mudbrick house walls. But it's a little ridiculous that civilian housing provides an effective wall. Just use the actual walls... You know... Plus house walls look really ugly... Ugly like building farms around the CC (an illogical AoE convention), for easy garrisonability of women and skimping out on wood by not building a farmstead (which really should be a pre-requisite for building farms, or even gathering food in general. Why is the CC used as a storage yard, when a storehouse is one of the earliest structures you need to build anyway??)... I derive no pleasure from defeating an enemy like this, and "pro-players" destroy "noobs", because the noobs don't know about these "faulty" mechanics. How is that fun? A lot of the "pro-players" depend on the ignorance of their opponents to win... This is supposed to be a strategy game, not a take-advantage-of-mechanics-that-new-players-can't-possibly-know-about game, because this stuff is not clearly written down anywhere. That's cheating, i.m.o... At least, their should be a strategy and tactical guide that explains the mechanics that should be looked out for, like: diminishing farm returns, embedding women with your workers, and the effect of experience on gather rates, garrisoning ships with siege and units so they actually become effective, never using formation when fighting, the effectiveness of kiting, the amazing efficiency with which women can take out battering rams... Those kind of things... Ideally, you should have easy access to this info in game, like a question mark button with each unit/building that brings up a pop-up message explaining all the specifics about that unit/building.

Changing options in the menu shouldn't allow to modify the gameplay and give a advantage: training the units by 2 are more efficient, specially in the beginning, right? (by the pro videos that I've seen). Also it's an option that easily gets oversighted, so I suggest that the numbers of units should be fixed, like before. Of course it's nice to have this feature for the engine, but not for the game.

I was lazy to report this, but yeah, the walls leave a gap between the towers when stretched, and the gates don't align properly to the wall. I was gonna mention it in a future post though

@wowgetoffyourcellphone no matter how i move the uv in the chest, they weren't made for this horse when i fix the uv for one they break for the other and so on.

You said it. I was only thiniking...

@OuGaming Short answer depends and looking back it's unlikely -> We won't hire someone with no experience though so he'll have to get to know the code beforehand.

Lighting makes or breaks 0 A.D. I think the lighting settings could use a lot of tweaking to get the full effect, and of course the new shadow map for the next alpha is a vast improvement and should make the game look a lot better. I just often wonder why the game looks ugly on some videos and good on others. I think it's the maps they choose to play. Some really make use of the game's assets and lighting in a good way and some don't. Just some random musings. This guy does a pretty good video discussing the game. There's even a poll.

I think asking him is not a problem at all, and it doesn't even need to be official, if you folks want to ask him as members of the community that sounds fine to me. However, if we need to put money in this, then my opinion is we're not ready, for all the reasons mentioned above Any publicity is publicity, I agree with that, but it makes no sense to spend money on presenting something that might significantly differ from the final product. IMO going to Beta is a guarantee that the game is ready to be judged by the general public. We will also be in a position of handling criticism from players that are outside the community, which is something we cannot dedicate most of our time on right now.

I'd say scale your own horse mesh, not the original horse mesh. Yours is much better. Yeah, the pony looks like it has "fatter" proportions, and stubbier legs. Also, its head is larger in proportion than a horse's head.

You know, sell. in this era alpha is beta and beta is 1.0 and the release is game of year edition or complete edition. at last people buys game incomplete in "early access". Other they understimate maie a RTs.

I am not sure why they say this game is in beta. It's obviously still pre-alpha.

There is a tutorial for tilemaps: http://www.meandmark.com/tilingpart1.html (as PDF: http://www.meandmark.com/tiling.pdf).

Main Menu -> Tools & Options -> Atlas Map Editor

usually 6 batch is more efficient than 5 but having a batch size of 2 is just more flexible in most situations because you can go up to 4 or 6 and such. Some top players even switch batch size depending on how many resources do they have ( 6 at start then 3 or 4 depending on the situation ) which is the MOST efficient way to invest your resources ( pop cap permitting )

It's not well advertised and I still don't really know how to do this (never done it before). If one person sets it up in his menu, does it apply to all players in MP games, or only the person that set it up like that?

Hmm, I think that is a gameplay decision. Right now it's possible to just swap the hero or whoever between infantry and cavalry versions. But what you're saying is that you'd like the horse to always be hanging around somehow when the unit is in infantry mode. I can imagine some issues with that, though I do understand that seeing the unit magically change from infantry to cavalry with the horse poofing out of nowhere is somewhat of a minor immersion killer. The horse-mounting feature could be included for narrative campaign-sake and mods, but I'd imagine it would be tedious micro to do that in a PvP match. One way to do it is with the garrisoning component too instead of the upgrade component. Or make a whole new component as I believe is now possible.

gameboy please empty your mods folder and test mods one by one to see which one is broken. Then the author of the mod can fix it.

How can he with out knowing which mods you have guess and most likely be wrong Enjoy the Choice

That's a good idea. A solution could be to use the modulo operator on the entity ID, with the quantity of different pitches. The resulting number then would be used to select the pitch for that entity. It would no longer be randomized, but it feel random in most cases, and it would automatically be bound to the entity ID.

yes, good catch. I've added a fix in svn https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/20658 But i encourage you to report such issues either on trac (if you only report it) or phabricator (if you also provide a patch). Forum posts are not always read (at least by me) and it would be a pity to have to rediscover all these issues in the next version a few months from now.

Moved up the legs when trusting.

Sounds like none to me ?