Leaderboard

Apologies everyone, I am away on spring break right now. I consent to the reimbursement for this trip. I am glad we were able to represent 5 members! In general I am quite busy at University at the moment, so I think it would be best if someone else who is more active in the community and staff take my role on the Treasury Committee.

Position: Gameplay Developer Do you understand that Wildfire Games is a non-commercial project, work for 0 A.D. is volunteer, and work is done for free? Yes, and while I wouldn't mind any interesting professional occupation paying my expenses, I value non-monetary interactions as superior towards creativity and honesty. Do you agree to distribute all your work for Wildfire Games under Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license? I'll shoe ya all if you steal MY work (Actually, no I won't throw sues at you and yes, I agree) Are you sure you are not wanting to work on something programming related? (Then you don't need to send in an application form.) Yes, but I could occasionally do some simple tasks like in the past. Name: Nikos (or Nick), from Nikolaos. Full name currently classified (I'm getting funny). Email: I'd rather not post it in a thread. Location: Athens, Greece. Availability: I generally could offer several hours a week, often many hours a day and would also usually be reachable during my work hours. But as my schedule and priorities aren't always stable, I might have small periods of inactivity. The motivation of working on something I really like, from a position I consider meaningful, would probably mean I won't quit unless something really serious happens. Age: Soon to be thirty-two. Occupation: I'm now eating dried nuts with honey (I'm getting funnier). But I'm an optician/salesman/bored/whatever... Motivation: Love of history, strategy games and their design. Creative/healing brain activity. Working in a team instead of alone. Personality: Ignorant human being, skeptic, anti-authoritarian, a weird mix of a romantic and a cynic, rather shy, wannabe philoshoper, trying to be a decent/just person. Skills and Experience: See just bellow. Short Essay: I've been a strategy game player since about the year 2000, starting with Age of Empires, Age Of Kings, Myth I & II at friends' places, without owning a computer. It started for good though 2-3 years later when I bought Age Of Mythology and soon Warcraft III, which are probably my most played games, along with Rome Total War and World Of Warcraft. The first thing I did when I first run AOM was to create a scenario with the editor. I found about 0 A.D. online, sometime in the mid 00s, while searching for new strategy games. I've been a minor contributor to the game as well as a modder for it and RTW, WC3, Civ V. Also a map maker/scenario designer for AOE, AOK, AOM, AOE 3, Rise Of Nations, Stronghold Crusader and Civ III-V among other games. Besides playing, modding and designing strategy (and rpg) video games , I've designed tabletop/card games since a young age and been a history nerd since my pre-school years, with the ancient era (and it's military part) being my favorite. I'm intrigued by strategy game design from creative, balancing and realism/historical perspectives. While trying to find what works best under any given circumstances, besides a lot of trial and error, I've read on game design and self-studied on how various games work and try to achieve their goals. Interests and Hobbies: Music listening/composing (with a focus on lyrics), reading, writing, the occasional mountain-walking, socio-political/scientific/philosophical discussions. I'll soon try to sing my songs in a band for the first time instead of playing guitar. May the higher beings of the universe help me. Staff: I don't know any team member personally. Community: Currently none besides this one, but I have participated in several game forums (thehiveworkshop and twcenter among others) and still check some of them at varied frequencies. Favorite Game: Impossible to single one or a couple. Lately I play Crusader Kings II more than anything else. I wish 0 A.D. becomes my favorite. Work Examples: You could check the mod Ancient Empires, though at the moment it's broken by game updates, stagnated and much of the information on the forum is outdated. If need be I could also dig for and provide my work for other games, in various states of playability. I fear all of this might not be tempting enough and I'm also not sure that the team wants a gameplay designer, but I strongly believe one or more are needed. So I thought, why not apply instead of keeping to spam the forum with suggestions as I've done occasionally for years now. To be honest I've thought about it in the past as well but this is the first time I took it seriously. I'd love to make my dream strategy game or mod a reality, but at this point I'm so full of ideas it's hard to choose on which to work and working alone is a serious drain on my motivation. If I were to be accepted in the team I'd prefer to focus on a practical approach. I'd like to know what is planned, how the team works internally and to what degree changes are debatable as of now, because what I get from reading the forums is rather confusing. I guess it's most realistic not to have extreme expectations about possible changes, so I'll provide some short proposals bellow based on that assumption ( = don't shoe me for making no mention of battalions). Mind that my observations are based on playing up to A21, and then on, only on impressions from forum comments, so please excuse any neglect on my part. Anyway, to the proposals: Phases & Tech-Tree Layout Capturing, Rank And Looting Mechanics Citizen Soldier Concept Unit Roles, From Historical And Gameplay Perspectives. Counters And Their Function Game Pace And Scale Territories Visual Cohession Civ Differentiation Heroes Maps I can take the time to provide a more unified and personal gameplay proposal with additional details if that's desired, but I thought this rather generic approach describing possibilities is best since I have almost no clue on what is planned (and to what degree things are planned) behind the scenes and even if accepted I don't expect full control on the design anyway. What I would find ideal is working with a small number of sensible and friendly people that have a clue on gameplay design, while taking in account other team and community opinions as well. This was my first application on anything ever, I hope it's not terrible and that my english are fully understandable. Thanks for taking the time to read, Prod/Nikos

I quite agree with the word "selfnishness" that you've used I think what most players would love is a better pathfinder and less lag, much more than a new civ or some new buildings. Does that mean we should delay the release until we have them? And even without going to that extreme, there are always some improvments (a new animation, a new feature, ...) which would be nice to have and with somebody thinking it would be a good reason to delay a release. Futhermore, even with several major changes, people will talk on the web about a new release for no more than 2-3 weeks, and then switch to something else. So, to maintain the interest on the game and attract more new players, I think it would be much more efficient to have a short release cycle (six months looks good) rather than indefinitely delaying releases.

How thoroughly have you played A22? Have you tried installing the svn development version? Have you played A23? Do you have any experience in programming projects' teamwork? What exactly are you applying for? What could you contribute? What would you be able to do you can't do currently? As can be seen on the forums, there is no shortage of good ideas. If you ask a dozen people for a proposal, you'll get at least a dozen different suggestions. Getting consensus is much harder. Also, would you be comfortable with assisting in implementing ideas you don't agree with? Hopefully you don't mind me asking questions. I'm just curious

Its a bit slower than the current one, given it does away with the spreadsheet, but i can see how it can be more intuitive for newer artists. Had a bit of a problem with actually saving my changes, though i may have set up my config file wrong. Definitely takes a bit of getting used to navigation-wise, maybe some windows can be labeled better for someone not familiar with how these things work?

Ptol blanket, celt champion blanket, and rome saddle.

i'll make it shorter Cyrus blanket:

Maybe it makes more sense to wait for the new structures to get in game. Then forts will have more room for extra champions, or some could fit in barracks/stables etc or merc camps accordingly to civ and decisions.

Considering I am the one getting most of the reimbursement, I propose myself. I pledge to transmit the money that goes to other people as soon as I receive it.

@Prodigal Son your application makes me write my first post after 8 months... One of the best things I've read on this forums so far, giving me new hope for the future of this game... I wish you and the team the best (may they accept your offer!)... Hopefully gameplay will no longer limit the true potential of 0 A.D.!

Yes, the AI is more or less able to cope with them, although some final tweaks will be needed when these structures are really in. But more globally concerning this thread, we agreed in the team some time ago to wait until a23 is out before enabling these structures, and i don't see any good reason to change that decision and delay more the release. My motivations to support this decision were: - only enabling the existing structures is not enough, we should take this opportunity of new available structures to give more diversity (based on history) between civs, and not just adding what is available. And that will take time. - that will inevitably require some balance, which will also take time to have it right (even if some people here seems to think it is useless for an alpha, i don't see how it can help the fame of 0ad to release something unbalanced). - A23 is already quite late compared to what we wanted (we were aiming at beginning of february) and staying in a pre-release state for too long does not help development as it prevents the important changes that people don't dare to do before a release. - A23 has already a huge highlight, the kush, and most of the other changes may go unnoticed in comparison. I'd much prefer to have a short A24 in a few months highlighting these new structures with possible improved diversity between civs.

Although Erik and I are in favor, I will still tag @MishFTW one more time. --- In the mean time, I am attaching a link to SPI's reimbursement request form: http://www.spi-inc.org/treasurer/SPI_reimbursement_request.pdf Unfortunately there is a USD 22 charge for outgoing wire transfers charged by SPI's international payment system, so it is best to minimize the number of transfers. I suggest we reimburse one participant for the FOSDEM expenses and that person would then transmit the money to the other participants with their respective shares.

Introduction Realising that confusion on where the gameplay is/should be heading is still going on and inspired by discussion in this thread, I've got a number of different proposals for the game. They are based mostly on old ideas (not necessarily mine), while writen mostly on memory and would have improvements, extra details and better presentation had I used my notes. However I'll try to be as objective as I can about them and explain their pros and cons in hopes that they might inspire something. They also include related games that you might like if you like each Idea or regardless. 1. "4x/Grand Strategy with Tactical/Battalion Combat System" Features: Battalion/Positional Combat (flanking etc) Battalion-only Recruitment Battalion Leveling & Customization Running/Charging, Morale and/or Stamina, Unit Abilities? Demoralized/Depopulated units (battalions) will flee to a friendly town (or territory) to replentish unless destroyed/rallied Towns are single, customizable/upgradable entities, (could be consisting of additional current building models under a single entity as they upgrade?) Towns have their own manpower pools and tech levels Towns and capturable resources/structures autogenerate income (or grant bonuses), possibly only if occupied by worker "battalions", including captured enemies (slaves) Lootable trade routes between cities and ports. Supply lines? Focus on real world maps? Pros: Not overdone, much room for innovation Easy to assign unit roles even without counters Easy to represent large armies Fits great with territory and capturing concepts Easier to design campaigns and sandbox historical scenarios Religion/Culture/Politics could fit in well as techs, choice pairs, auras etc Easier and fitting to introduce new civs Cons: A quite a lot of work thrown away, and extra work needed Limited/no citybuilding More prone to snowballing due to capturing Hard to balance a competitive multiplayer game in this style Similar Games: Hegemony Series (Philip of Macedon/Gold/Rome e.t.c.) Partly Similar Games: Paradox Games (Crusader Kings, Europa Universalis, Stellaris e.t.c), Rise Of Nations / Empire Earth, Total War Series , Spartan / Gates Of Troy 2. "Age Of Empires Clone" Features: Familiar Age Of Kings based gameplay No citizen soldiers, capturing, leveling, territories, heroes Mostly shared unit classes among civs Universal upgrades Focus on Random Maps Mostly Hard Counters Pros: Tested formula and desired by many who want the new AOE Kinda easy to balance Relatively little extra work needed in art and coding Scouting is valuable and replayability high due to random maps Cons: Some work thrown away Very little innovation Similar Games: AOE Series, Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds 3. "Starcraft A.D." Features: Familiar RTS gameplay, somewhat more modern and fast paced than AOE No citizen soldiers, capturing, leveling, territories, heroes Structure Requirements instead of Ages/Phases, Local Structure Upgrades Unique roosters for each civ Focus on Skirmish Maps Mix of Soft and Hard Counters Pros: Tested formula, ideal for competitive if done right Relatively little more work needed in art and coding Unique unit roosters Scouting is valuable due to largely visible tech Balanced Skirmish Maps Cons: Hard to balance and diversify unit roosters due to similarities among historical troops and the number of civs Some work thrown away Not much innovation Similar Games: Starcraft, Armies Of Exigo Partly Similar Games: Warcraft Series 3.5. "2 & 3 Mixed With Possible Extras" Features: Familiar RTS gameplay No universal citizen soldiers, capturing, leveling, (heroes/territories?) Structure Requirements instead of Ages/Phases, Local Structure (and some local tech?) Upgrades Partly unique roosters for each faction OR "unique feature": Customizable units (chose weapons & armor with preset stats bonuses and cost for each of your unit classes in game) "Unique Civ features" : A civ could upgrade/level units through combat (Romans?), another have a limited form of citizen soldiers (Athenians?), another units that toggle between melee and ranged weapons (Persians?) another have (some) soldiers that can build e.t.c. Focus on Random Maps Mix of Soft and Hard Counters Pros: Partly tested formula Relatively little more work needed in art and coding Scouting is very valuable due to largely visible tech and random maps. High replayability. Cons: Could be a bit hard to balance A little work thrown away Not too much innovation Similar Games: Empires Apart, Ancient Wars Sparta / Fate Of Hellas Conclusion While I know that none of the ideas above is reinventing the genre, I consider them doable and cohesive enough and I think the game needs something along those lines to reach a complete stage at some point in the not-so-distant future. It might be still on alpha, but how many more alphas will there be? I guess 4 to finish the latin alphabet, or even just 1 to complete it's classical form? Going to Beta usually means a feature-complete game lacking only polish. By going overly-ambitious while changing goals frequentily along the way things get messed up. This should be especially understood by an everchanging team of unpaid volunteers if they are to deliver something good, which would be quite an achievement and is still possible. I'll try to rank my proposed ideas in two ways. If going by innovation (and risk) as the desired factor, I'd suggest them in order 1>3.5>3>2. If going by practicality I'd likely say the opposite, though I'm not sure on how to rank 3.5 and 3 in this case. Imo the last 3 could easily trade specific features with each other but not with the first one. Anyway... eveyrone is free to steal from the above for whatever use, also discuss, challenge, add your own.

Shorter

The balance between ranked up citizen soldiers and champions could be easily changed, it's just editing a few numbers in the desired direction. That said, I don't like them ranking up in the current gameplay form for reasons I've already mentioned. Your point of idealy having to single out and save individuals in order to have max army efficiency is another in that direction. The example from fantasy games was about a different approach to late game units, one with great variety, not about level up and heroes. It often mixes with that though and that's another big discussion with many pros and cons in gameplay. In general leveling units, much like battalions (or a combination of both), better fit in games with simpler economy because they usually require more individual micro. They are also very hard to balance. Especially in the case of leveling heroes with active skills and the like, the game becomes prone to focusing too much around them. They might lead to win or lose moments, where your leveled up hero can do too much if kept alive or leave your army helpless if killed and possibly provide a lot of experience to the killing player's heroes causing irreversible situations. The game becomes very dynamic but also very random and "snowbally". In other games with weaker heroes, those add unit variety and possibly some army enhancement, while causing distraction from other parts of the game in order to control and keep them alive. In the end it's all about a mix of personal preferance and striking the right balance with other game elements.

Macedonian hero blanket:

I think the reason unit ranking works well with battalions is because the units in battalions regenerate (albeit slowly) which allows steady progress to be made when gradually levelling during battles. The current promotion system has individual units which die too easily. This makes it too difficult to retreat and salvage your veteran troops. You end up with a mix of low and high ranks that just tend to cycle rather than gradually increase in strength; the net effect of a few higher ranked units mixed in is negligible. "Champion" units are always preferred and resources are the only limiting factor. It is orders of magnitude more effective to work on resource management and train champion units, than it is to micromanage unit training to create an army of elite (veteran) troops. These "elite" troops also happen to be weaker than champion units which makes the situation worse. As you mentioned, in other games individual unit ranking is reserved for very strong, unique units like true elite warriors and heroes. I just feel that it isn't really working well currently which is sad because there is likely a lot of potential. It doesn't break anything and the game is still enjoyable, so it's mostly just been left alone.

From L to R: Elite Swordsman Basic (is using it the advanced rank of swordsman since the basic version has just a plain leather blanket but still is the most basic desing of the blankets on celtic factions) Champion Advanced Javelin

Ptolemaic Egypt Land of the Pharaohs

Hello, I'm trying 0AD Venustas after sometime without playing 0AD and Petra is kind of kicking my @#$%. I think is hard to adapt to gameplay changes. So I have some suggestions to make users "learn" how to play easier. 1. Nice loading screens with some advice for gameplay (it would be better if this advice is related to latest changes). 2. Ingame wiki. I remember when playing AoM there was a wiki and you could click on the portrait of each unit/building and a page popped up showing as much historical information as in-game unit stats, and some advice like "good against: cavalry, projectile", "weak against: infantry, swords" or whatever. But I think there is no official wiki for 0ad and maintining it is extra work.

Going to war during summertime and the (upper classes of the) farmer population as soldiers would be culture/region-dependant things, that said, mostly true. I think though summer was the prefered wartime due to favorable weather conditions (especially important to supply lines and ancient galley navies which had troubles in rough seas). However, the citizen levy wasn't that big as a percentage. To my knowledge, Athens with an estimated peak population between 300000-500000 people never fielded more than 15000 own troops, and that not speaking of single battles, but war-wide. Perhaps a few thousand more if you add fleet rowers, but still... A majority of the population would keep doing their jobs, unless under threat of immidiate annihilation, usually when trapped in siege defense, so in most cases every worker as a citizen soldier doesn't make sense. Maybe a bit more sensible for tribes and small states that were under grave threat more frequently. I'd say Spartans were a bit more hardened than that, even if their myth is indeed over the top, especially at periods when the agoge was esteemed. Wrestling, phalanx drills (and encouragement of helot bullying/murders by spartan youth) come to mind, as well as a very basic diet. Likewise, phalanx drills and generally military service/training in peacetime (including catapult shots for every athenian recruit at least during a period) happened for other states. Not every mercenary would just seek to eat and survive, many would become rather rich, well armored and powerhungry/politically successful. Others seem to have seeked adventures in general, but I agree that in most cases poverty was the main driving factor. More or less like today, but propaganda plays a bigger part now. Besides Macedon and Rome (btw Alexander's pikemen were able to perform some impressive maneuvers in full kit), most kingdoms would have a kind of professional/standing army. Think seleucid silvershields, persian "immortals" and royal guards in general. Even tribal chief retainers. Elite hoplite units like athenian logades and theban sacred band were probably something similar, even if not in the thousands. Anyway I'm partly getting careed away, but I largely disagree with your assumption if it is to suggest that citizen soldiers should be the standard in game terms, for historical reasons. Yes they were the majority of combat troops for most states/wars/periods of antiquity, but there were still a rather small percentage of the male population in most cases. Historicaly speaking, most workers in game should just be workers. In short, this: "They were probably added for historical accuracy and to differentiate early 0 A.D. from AOK. But even taking historical accuracy into account, not every male citizen, non-citizen (person with reduced rights, such as immigrants) or slave was a soldier in war times. In fact a minority in most cases. The classic RTS way of recruitment can be argued to be equally or more historical, representing the ones who went for training or picking up arms in the barracks as soldiers, while the rest as workers." Champions could be reshaped to be unique units with unique functions accordingly to civ, instead of just late game super-buffed-troops universally. Unit class upgrades would be superior to rank-up through combat from a gameplay perspective cause they don't snowball with each kill and provide strategic options (I have some resources to spend, do I need stronger spearmen or swordsmen? Or should I just train more?).

Brit/gaul champion and hero blanket: @stanislas69 once finished i'll leave this blend file for the art repo.

been looking the units close and dind't saw any armor or blanket calling the wrong variant. heres a screenshot of the iber armor wich has all variants included too, if the armor and blanket remains in the idle animations is because it isn't reading any attack melee animations, but as can be seen here the armor and the blanket follows the horse.

Update: Iberian: athenian Carthaginian Fur: Persian basic rank:

It would probably need rebalancing of like half the tech-tree to get those in though, maybe much more time is needed for changes and testing.

We need to be able to restart games

@stanislas69 they remain at the idle formation animation after attack, so at least one part of the patch is working also if i click hold position after start moving they keep the animation too