Leaderboard

A thing that needs to be realised though is that the game is still in alpha, and any tutorial that is made for that alpha alone could later be outdated in just a few alphas. Balance is a good idea to continue to evolve since that keeps an active playerbase for the game. Trigger warning: I'll next write about game design. Regarding counters. I personally dislike that word as an explanation of how units interact beyond a simple rock-paper-scissors formula. Although it is possible to build on that, it rapidly becomes convoluted. I would look to the previous document which outlined counters for 0 A.D. It was very unintuitive. I personally prefer the term 'roles,' a less loaded concept since counters generally only define units by what they are good against. Can there be some hard and soft counters in the mix? Yes, but there should be more to a unit's design than just that. The ultimate goal embraced by the original makers of 0 A.D. was a combat system that was more like total war, and ideas for how units should operate should be established within that kind of framework. Were there counters in that system? True, yet much of the bases for these were due to the tactics players employed against those units.

The Total War team made the announcement on Twitter, revealing that the historical strategy game will launch in Fall 2018, and will be the first game in the series to explore ancient China. Accompanying the announcement is the game's first trailer. The game will be set in 190CE, and will focus on the heroes of the period as they fight to unite China under a single banner. The game will be developed by Creative Assembly, and published by Sega. While other potential platforms have not been announced, the game will be released on Steam and is available to be added to wishlists now. In the game, the child-emperor is being manipulated by a tyrant, Dong Zhuo, who exerts an oppressive rule over China. Three heroes will swear allegiance to one another and rise up with the support of warlords from great families, banding together to challenge him. If some of that sounds familiar, perhaps you've played a Dynasty Warriors game before - this period makes up a part of that series' narrative.

High contrast and saturation can be easily misused, that doesn't make it objectively bad.

My, my. The discussion has devolved into a general gameplay discussion. Balance I noticed that in every Alpha, different balancing complaints are being addressed: 1. Roman Swordsman rush destroys Civic Centers immediately! That's no fun 2. Skiritai Commando and Slinger Rushes destroy buildings quickly! That's no fun 3. Cav Rushes are too OP! That's no fun 4. Ranged Cavs are unstoppable! That's no fun 5. There's something wrong with Siege Weapons! Is there an end to this? Counter System Yeah, it needs to be brought back since the planned combat system has yet to take successful fruit. Citizen Soldiers I'll advocate that Citizen Soldiers should only be available in the Civic Center. Because, you know, they are Citizen Soldiers (villagers that can fight; NOT soldiers that can gather). They are technically defined as Resource Gatherers, but they're visually defined as Fighters. -- This is where the developer/designer-to-player miscommunication happens. Different "Barracks" for Different Types of Units It's getting there. We'll just have to wait. Even the Siege Workshop is being done. Gameplay Vision Seriously, the classic playerbase vs. modern playstyle is rearing its ugly head again. And the devs (who still need a tremendous amount of help) are being forced on the fence trying to decide how the game should be played.

for boudica commands.txt metadata.json

Hello everyone. I do this feedback after my first solo part. The game is pretty cool, but for me, it misses several things: - Key Configurations - Customize the size of the HUD - Inactive citizens are not very visible - The towers' arrows are not really visible - Walls are difficult to place without an automatic block - Ability to personalize the amount of resources given to allies I did not see that it was planned on the roadmap so I propose. Good continuation :)

(Answers added on kermit request)

He most likely learned to use a keyboard with a typewriter remember those two spaces after a sentence was the standard for over fifty years it's only with the advent of word processing that it changed as for being easier to read all the formal research says there is no real difference in either speed or comprehension. Enjoy the Choice

Jomon goes up to 300 BC, so it's still within the right period for references, but yeah, they're culture starts very early Indeed... But it does make them more comparable to the Zapotecs and other potential future pre-colombian civs in many regards, which is interesting (no real navy, no cavalry, no iron). Personally I'm fine with the Kofun/Asuka/Yamato period, but it would be nice to use Jomon and Yayoi references for village and town phase, and "evolve" into Kofun Japan in city phase...

The Gohma techtree will need more allowed 'trainer units' due to its egg > larva > gohma mechanic, what file in the gui allows one to set that again? I remember seeing the variable earlier, but due to the overhaul of the gui in 0.23 I'm not sure it's still in the same place.

That, and also an improved tutorial can be needed. Age of Empires serives have a whole campaign to help player understanding the mechanics. The first campaign of each of these games guides players step by step. I didn't really check that but i think 0AD's tutorial teaches the basis, but doesn't go in depth (which is perfectly understandable as the more advanced parts are really dynamic and change from alpha to alpha, it's really not a priority to make that stuff. It's not finished game) That's funny because when i played a21, i started with an "how to make good eco" tutorial map that was there. It was probably outdated as i didn't have the time to follow instructions, probably because the training time was lower in even previous alpha. I ended up becoming good quite fast, after struggling with that tutorial.

That is the topic of theory colour that I mentioned some time ago. I wasn't referring to you, @Lion.Kanzen as you said in another post. A little bit off-topic (because it refers mostly to land textures), and also the mood of the discussion was too much tense, but is interesting enough.

I think too that rams, and siege units in general are balanced. I agree with that However i don't think siege stats should be changed as i think they are balanced. Thing is that if we blindly change balance for next alpha only for some complaints, bigger problems may be raised. I think that the only problem right now is that some players don't see how to counter siege even though it's completely possible right now. But if we nerf siege for next alpha, not only will they be less efficient but this time players will clearly see how to counter them and we may have lots of complaints that it is so easy to turtle, and that would be a way bigger issue imo. I also think that in a21 skirm cav was also very strong and that people didn't see it, but clearly did in a22 after a change (that wasn't that important i suspect). Btw i checked Nescio's mod and that may be a good idea to have that p2 siege workshop. The balance changes that came with it are meh, but the general idea can be thought some more.

Hi ! The screenshot don't show them very clearly, but there are some mines (behind the roman caer) and animals (not only crocodiles). But the map needs a better painting and some more decorations, that's right. Yes, you're right. mapSize in only defined in my test script "Usually" ? Anyway, I think the best would probably be to have three painters, because for now Fractal and Cracks painters give exactly the same result when nochiasm is set to false. Friendly,

For fishing vessels I was thinking something like the coracle, basically a simple/primitive pre-historic usually round(ish) vessel made of branches over spun with animal skin (sometimes waterproofed wicker), once common from Neolithic Britain to the modern day native Americans, including seeing use in Central Asia, including Mongolia. I can't find anything specifically on Xiongnu river transport, but a number of nice rivers full of juicy fish traverse their territory... For transport/trade, they could have a raft. Simple wooden frame supported by inflated animal skins. Coracles and other animal skin-vesels from around the world:

Exactly, i defend the sycounter system for a long time, it is necessary for any rts.

Gonna relieve some of my stress by stating what the recent patch includes: Improved server connection by lessening the amount of playerbase (maximum of 2 per session) Better management of financial resources (on the players' side) by the steady decline of Empires Apart's gains Improved method of alienating the Youtubers who promoted the game Resonance22 found out that the devs care little about his work ZeroEmpires has yet to make his review (probably he can't make it positive enough) Making the spinning unit a forever-feature because they love players whine about it

I did not say that can not be better, I said that in the current moment (alpha), it is a cowardice. Well, i agree with you on most of the issues you see in 0a.d. 1- I would like to see towers and forts that can be built in neutral territory; 2- I wish units could destroy enemy buildings more easily; 3- CC should not train combat units, just women, you should be forced to have a barrack for this. these are some things I would like to have, the gameplay would improve, but they are just my points

Sure. Territory in 0ad is pretty cool, although I think eco buildings should be untied from it. The fact that you can't spam towers in the enemy base is probably better than in aok. Tower rushes were super lame in that game. The fact that you can hunt with cav rather than having to herd animals to your CC is definitely an improvement. Herding was freaking lame. Relics were also lame. 0ad's barter system is definitely an improvement over aok. There are lots of things we do better. There are a few important things that we do worse though. 0ad's buildings are virtually unkillable until city, which is lame. Towers were fairly strong in aok but they could be killed by a mob of infantry. Walls of houses are also freaking lame. Citizen soldiers are a disaster that ties eco to combat units and makes unit choices heavily eco bound. The fact that the vast majority of combat units come from the barracks for most civs is also bad because it means there are fewer meaningful decisions, and this is compounded by citizen soldiers since civs that have, say, a separate building for producing infantry and cav are extra limited by the eco limitations of cav. It also limits combat in the early game since any use of combat units for actual combat sacrifices eco. Rushes tend to be limited to top players because of this. Basically unless your rush is really, really effective in suppressing your enemy's eco it's practically suicide and most people aren't willing to take such a high risk. It's also a major nerf to mercs, which I don't think are even as strong relatively as aok's t2 units. The fact that women don't add arrows to CCs, towers, etc, is also lame. If you accidentally garrison them in an arrow-shooting building they're worse than useless since they prevent units that do add arrows from garrisoning. The fact that fortresses can't be built in neutral is also lame, since unlike towers forward fortresses were a very interesting and useful strategic move in late game aok. AOK had stronger unit counters. It mattered a whole lot more what units you decided to build. In 0ad it feels a whole lot like spamming random units (or just spamming everything except maybe pikemen) is the way to go. I don't necessarily like the unit counter arrangements in aok entirely, but in general it was more interesting than what we have. We don't have any riot units. AOK had tactical catapults (mangonel, onager) that were only mediocre vs buildings but which could splat enemy armies into mashed potatoes. They were also very vulnerable to being killed, which made for interesting exchanges. No, cowardice is refusing to compare your game to a similar game which you know to be better. Just because it was a good game does not mean that it can't be improved upon, and if you aren't willing to address the weaknesses of your own game then you will never improve upon them, either. What you've said is like saying "oh I shouldn't bother learning to play piano beyond chopsticks because mozart was so great that I'll never be as good as him". If everyone took that attitude there would be no musicians, no artists, and no great games in the first place. Why make aok when chess is obviously such a great game?

Is there anything you like in the game lol ? So far all you have looked at is crap :p

Still that's how the game has been working since Mythos left. I agree it's not always for the best, but the game isn't that bad ^^

https://github.com/Pyrophorus/YAMG/blob/master/yamg/maps/random/yamg/fractal.js#L82 mapSize should be g_Map.size I think. https://github.com/Pyrophorus/YAMG/blob/master/yamg/maps/random/yamg/fractal.js#L184 if you put nochiasm in the paint function the user cannot set it, since paint is usually called by a library function which does not know about it. It needs to be an instance variable and to be set in the constructor.

Hi, I'll try this out of curiosity. Thanks. Now the YAMG for A-23 is on Github. No new features but a full upgrade. The fractal painters expect an Area in their paint() method and mesa and depression painters provide a Vector2D array, instead of point array. The Cell object inherits now from Vector2D and can be used in rmgen where a Vector2D is required. Of course, the placer and the utilities which rely on this Cell array can't be used without creating a g_TOMap Cell objects first. AnEgyptianOasis is still a work in progress. It works nicely and don't lack features, but some details need to be fixed, particularly players starting resources. I have quickly copy/pasted some code somewhere and this code fails at time for some reasons. Have fun !

You need to remove buildingAI for that.

Who will use Sutton Hoo helmet? Based on this version: Ingame after some corrections:

Yeah

Who will get this weapon and why ? What will be his purpose on the civilization ? How they should shoot if the weapon is called repeating crossbow but 0 A.D only has 1 animation type for ranged attacks and reloading.

This topic is sponsored by: Counters must come back

it was the mesh having some wrong edges but it ended having more tris. Files: Brit_shield.7z

Celtic gentlemen I'm going to upload the new cape textures in a separate post

Gorgeous! I love the new shield! Although it seems to curve inwards at the top and bottom, while it's ok/preferable for this shield to be flat (was attached to a wooden frame). Remember the shield belongs to the Britons, and is inappropriate for the Gallic Viridomarus. On another note, that old helmet is the Ciumesti helmet from Romania (bronze). It has been featured in 2 famous Angus McBride illustrations, one of which shows Brennus sacking Delphi, making Brennus a nice choice to give that helmet to. Not saying it actually belonged to Brennus though... Which Brennus is featured in 0AD by the way? The one that sacked Delphi (279 BC) or the one that sacked Rome (390 BC)? I'm guessing Rome, right? Also the helmet can be animated. Those wings had some kind of hinges allowing them to "flap" with the movement of the wearer. So: Bronze Shield: for a British hero, preferably Cassivelaunus. Winged Helmet: for a Gallic hero, preferably Brennus. So, Cassivelaunus, chieftain/king and commander of the combined British forces opposing Caesars second invasion of Britain seems like the number 1 choice. The four kings of Kent: Cingetorix ("king of warriors"), Carvilius, Taximagulus and Segovax, who allied themselves with Cassivelaunus and attacked the Romans who had laid siege to Cassivelaunus stronghold north of the Thames river, seem like interesting secondary choices. [DISCLAIMER]== Opinions ==[DISCLAIMER]

@wackyserious & @wowgetoffyourcellphone and others interested in Gauls and Britons. I noticed 2 mistakes in the Gaul Hero units: Brennus, a hero for the Gauls, is using a Brittonic Celtic helmet, namely the "Waterloo Helmet" which was found in London Viridomarus, a hero for the Gauls, is carrying a Brittonic Celtic shield, namely the "Battersea Shield", also found in London. The Waterloo Helmet (Celtic Britons, London): The Battersea Shield (Celtic Britons, London) Celtic Britons: Cassivelaunus, an important British chieftain. Why isn't this guy, who led the defence against Caesar's second invasion of Britain in 54 BC, a hero for the Britons? Instead we have the anachronistic Boudica, Caratacus and Cunobeline, who are literally all from the wrong time-period?! I'm all for widening the current time-frame of 0AD, but why only for the Britons? Both the helmet and the shield are famous, which makes these mistakes rather noticeable... In addition, the Celtic Briton heroes look a little underwhelming compared to the Gallic ones, which makes the using the epic Brittonic reference material for the Gauls more questionable. There's plenty of epic Gallic references to use for Gallic Heroes. Mainland Celts, good references for Gauls: Celtic Raid on northern Greece Hallstatt Celts attack Etruscans in northern Italy

NAKED FANATIC Experimented with textured brushes then selected its layers and used it to crop the base body textures, the result is a splattered subtle player color as seen below.

@wackyserious, some more Celts, including some with those typical patterns Brennus sacks Delphi The surrender of Vercingetorix to Caesar at the battle of Alesia. A little romantic, but worth the share I think Vercingetorix performs the old horse switcheroo, in a final whimsical gesture

Experimenting with the Celtic Cavalry Also tried to photo-manipulate and reconstruct Brennus' texture (it now uses the m_tunic_long.dae instead of the hero mesh) Also experimented with the high waist Celtic pants.

Balance? Maybe, maybe not, not that much if the stat changes are applied evenly for all civs, etc. We already have 15 variations of stats in your example with the promotions, so this wouldn't be much different. Now that I think about it, the Light/Medium/Heavy would probably have to replace promotions, unless promotions dealt strictly with 1 set of stats [attack rate, vision range, speed, etc.] while LMH would deal with a different set of stats [armor, cost, attack strength, etc.]. No overlap.Could work. I think the Blacksmith would be reworked. at the Blacksmith you would unlock Medium and Heavy options via techs. Light is the base cost, while Medium options add perhaps 20% and a further 20% with the Heavy option. Heavy might even add some metal to the cost or replace the wood or food cost. So, it would depend on what your economy is doing for you. I could imagine a Champion option being unlocked for some types of soldiers. Say, for the Gauls, you could have a standard swordsman available at the Barracks [which they currently don't have], with unlockable Medium->Heavy->Champion options.

The steppe biome definitely needs an upgrade.

I agree, what biome do you think is highest priority ?

I am chill as cucumber. Licking_bird just need to back up words (complain about art) with action (do something to improve situation). Much of capability still not utilized. I made this by just messing around in Atlas maps editor (and adjusted some terrain texture and XML). As you see the new unit models will do nice to help visualization. Edit terrain textures and make use of engine to potential. Stan, your textures are too blurry. Here, I think would be good for LOD system, when zoom out swap to lower res, less detail texture to remove noise. When zoom in you see high detail, high contrast. I know game use mipmaps but for terrains they seem to add noise or aren't very good.

There is another dimension to this noise topic: Without "noise" the maps don't look natural or organic. Surely a hand trimmed English lawn looks perfect to the eye, but doesn't fit into the game's overall realism. When the goal is to create textures which always work visually a set of low noise textures is good. If the goal is to allow beautiful and realistic scenarios noise or better organic structures are essential. To my eyes the AoE shots above (both) look like cheap plastic. If you carefully work every single tile in a 0AD map, the result looks real and tiling is not an issue. So, I think, the issue is not noise versus no noise, but having textures which look good with maps build in a day and having textures for maps designed in a month.

Okay so let´s try to actually make it constructive. To begin with and for reference here is a very nice video about colors http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj1FK8n7WgY Then I read the whole post this time. That´s right color variation are a bit hectoc but it´s hard for a non artist eye to percieve why and therefore your post only concerns very few people. Let´s move to the next step. Among other things I ´m working on a map pack assets for the game. So here is what i propose. Help me fix the xolor contrast by making new perfect ground textures. Could you do that ?

Why do you type two spaces after each sentence? It's slightly unpleasant to read.