Leaderboard

Change most of the gathering resources sounds for nein.ogg music. Compatible with other mods. DOWNLOAD nein.pyromod nein.mp4

I just would like to say that "the way it's done in Delenda Est" is only that way because of the engine's limitations (and my own limitations in not being able to code patches to make farming better; but even if I did have the chops to code a nice farming patch it could take years for "agreement" to add it to the base game, sigh; I mean, we're still talking about it even now). If I were to design a farming system from scratch it would be like "painting" the farms similar to the way terrain textures are painted in Atlas, with cost being deducted per tile painted. But if we were to keep "field" actors basically the way they are now, then like some have already suggested I would have areas of the map that give greater farming efficiency than others. And as you move the field's preview actor around you would see a percentage number change to tell you the efficiency of the farm if placed there. Around Civic Centers (and maybe other buildings besides Farmsteads and Corrals) you'd see something like 25%. Over grass and dirt it would be maybe 100%, over "farmland" terrain it would be 200%, over sand or rocky terrain 25%. The values open for debate. Different biomes could even have a global bonus or penalty for farms too, forcing different food strategies. These values could maybe be coded in the terrain XML files, or some other way of course, whatever is best. Also, field (and other building) foundations should delete individual trees (these trees would shade red when the field/building preview is hovered over them), but that's a different thing altogether (this works in DE, besides the red shading).

Yes, this little detail is missing from the game. Also, fields should use the build_farm actor variant for a seeding animations instead of banging a hammer against the dirt.

Person forgot to harvest the berries. Never build farms and not take berries!! Squares are rectangular As for the marketcc I'm not a fan, we got really nice actors for them and its a lot neater like this.

Some training with blender in laptop: Byza Stable WIP:

I would love if there was a feature, where when a citizen soldier is used to gather resources, then he would become just a regular unarmed villager. There should be like a armory building, where unarmed male villagers can go to, to turn into soldiers, there should be like a raid bell or something similar, so that when an attack happens, these unarmed citizens can become citizen soldiers. I believe in this way, raids can still be feasible, as citizen soldiers would be vulnerable to raiders when they are used as workers and this is also historically accurate, as citizen soldiers did not carry their weapons and armors at all times. This could be like a conscription idea, where male (and female in certain factions) villagers can become miltia or basic citizen soldiers when it is times of war. I hope I was clear in explaining this concept.

I like the direction of this discussion Or discarded completely? It would be nice if factions are diversified by historical merit, instead of this arbitrary stuff like Iberian starting walls or free houses for Ptolemies, which is very unhistorical, weird and feels like a cheap attempt at "diversifying". Ptolemies could have all sorts of bonuses ranging from higher pop-cap, higher income from mines, higher agricultural output, higher income from trade, more specific mercenaries, etc, all historically based. But free houses that take longer to build? Nah.. Cheap houses that take less time to build, maybe... Same for Iberians... just give them cheaper walls if you must, but I don't even really see the logic in that. Iberians could have higher income from loot, and coral benefits, on account of the cattle rustling and raiding (hoping that cattle becomes a thing in the near future). Anyway, yes to moving mines further It has bugged me for years as it also messes with your town planning (who would allow mining in the town center anyway?). It's so claustrophobic.. Turtling should be viable, but it can also be simultaneously nerfed by placing resources further away, and preventing farming in the immediate vicinity of the CC. This would allow you to effectively wall a built up area, but if you're being sieged, you'd eventually "starve" because you don't have access to resources. Right now you can farm while under attack as if nothing's going on and the starting resources usually last long enough to have a mini-trade route set up within you're walled area. Which is silly. Stronger, more expensive walls seems to be the way to go. They become more useful (with gates being the weak spots), but become less viable to spamming because of increased cost. Another thing I've been meaning to bring up in regard to trade and how the current mechanics could be improved: Currently markets generate the highest revenue if you place them furthest appart. Ok, seems reasonable, right? Not really... It results in people placing markets on the edge of their territory, away from their settlement. So now we have a situation, were people are farming in the town center, and building markets in the middle of nowhere. It should be the other way around. How? Simple: 1) A hard exclusion zone around the CC, which forces farms towards the outskirts of your territory 2) Profitability of markets is determined by 2 factors: relative distance to each other (like now) AND, how many houses are within it's radius. 1 - 10 houses represent respectively 10 - 100% market profitability. So the amount of resources a trader caries is determined by the market they're coming from (how many people "live there" and how far away is it) Bonus side-effect: people actually build up relatively concentrated satellite settlements (for increased income) with natural looking farmlands on their outskirt, as opposed to the classically awkward low density RTS-sprawl all over the map.

MAP NAME: Riverway Hello again, new random map to share. DESCRIPTION: This map is specially made for 1v1 2v2 3v3 4v4 team game as you can see. At each extreme of the river you can find gaia units protecting treasure bounty. Catch it if you can! All resources are concentrated at the middle so be fast to defend your territory ! Try it and give your opinion! DOWNLOAD LINK (mod) nani_maps_v0.10.0.pyromod AUTHOR: @nani COAUTHOR: @Hannibal_Barca

Corral can train some animals for food for example goat, pig, sheep, zebu(mauryans cow). but cannot train chicken in 0.a.d game play, some players build a lot of corral to train sheep/pig/goat/zebu(mauryans) instead building farmfields. at the first game play, there are some chicken for geather some food. but how about make chicken at the corral too?? if it works, chicken's train time is 20s, much faster then sheep (35s) and cost is 30 food (sheep cost = 50 food) Persian have a benefit to train chicken (train time =15, cost =25 food) because they breed the chicken first time not just train and slughter the chicken to earn food, when player leave chicken alive, 1 chicken produce eggs(food) 20/1m (persian chicken= 22/1m) player not just slughter chicken to earn food, but also earn eggs (food) very slowly but can slaughter when needs a lots of food. not just chicken, how about corral animals can produce some meterials like goat, cow, camel can produce milk/cheese for food, sheep produce wools (10 metal/1m) what do you think about it??

@Genava55 i remember use some of the references you are sharing in the making of the helmets, feel free to try the mod and have a closer look.

Helmet type Alésia - 1st century BC Helmet type Agen - 1st century BC Helmet type Forêt de Rouvray - 1st century BC Helmet variante of Forêt de Louviers - 1st century BC Helmet type Port - 1st century BC Helmet type Port variant of Mihovo: Helmet type Siemiechowa (Poland) - 1st century BC Helmet type Mihovo - 1st century BC Helmet type Boé - 1st century BC

I don’t finish off the AI opponent. It’s more fun to let them keep on attacking and fail. It’s more fun to build an empire with its beautiful structures and thriving community despite war. I play the game to infinity. Strobghold AI march very disciplined despite harassment. And they are not like 0ad who’s bulk attacking units gets held up by a single outpost.

Actually Irish Gaelic is not categorised with Welsh in the same Celtic linguistic group. It is usually grouped more with languages such as Mannish, and Scots Gaelic as P-Celtic (If I am not mistaken.) while Welsh is placed alongside languages such as Cornish, Cumbric, and Breton. It's a pretty minuscule point, but a point nonetheless.

When playing SP after establishing defenses my base looks so boring tbh. I have to delete farmers so that the food generations won’t reach millions. 0ad is in the better situation to be the best medieval RTS for SP. It’s just too dull after neutralizing the AI. The only movement inside my base are the animals and traders. I don’t even gather all the berries and trees around my first base to make it look better. 0ad can only become the best imho if it’s more realistic. For now MP is boring except the players funny joking around. Same spamming then win or lose. DE has better mechanics to lessen the spamming with more military activity and strategy in the early phases. There are more ways to make the game less spam and fast click one. But only AI can bribe. Mil AD AI enemy is much better with heavy and coordinated attacks. Anglo -Saxon wall garrison is not proper btw. More eyecandy on structures shrubs especially on the base. Wall Civs must be able to train archers even if they are triple expensive. Structures from other Civs must be available to be built by other Civs having historical connections. This way an SP player has more choices. Or revert the A22 mechanics where a captured unit can build their own Civs structures if it won’t contribute to errors. Stronghold has really the best resources gathering and weapons mechanics. The AI has a disciplined attack and best siege weapons too.

I really like this idea. On certain maps (desert) farmland should be a resource you fight for, just like you (should) do for mines. To bring up an example of a game where this was implemented: in Stronghold Crusader there were "green" areas on the map, usually very limited in size. All agricultural structures could *only* be built on these green areas, which became one of the most valuable territories one owned. It worked really well. Please don't make farms finite though. Microing farms is one of the least pleasant RTS experiences ever. On a related note I also don't think the game should force players to do or not to do certain things, like building farms around the CC, just because it's not pretty or realistic. Instead make it a multilateral decision. Currently there is a single aspect to take into consideration when placing farms: risk of the farmers being killed. And this risk can be minimized by building the farms around the CC, as simple as that. But if you introduce another aspect, say a terrain bonus, you suddenly don't have a single best way to place farms. You can take more risk for more gain, or play safe and loose on income. Placing farms is suddenly a *strategic* decision.

Nadie toma en cuenta al lince y su mod deberian incluir al axolotl como cardumen de peses, o algo haci https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axolotl

We agree Well, yeah, ideally, I'd loooove that... But I don't know how feasible it is from a coding/art point of view... A lot of fields have "arbitrary" shapes (hugging the curves of the land), sure, but even those are mostly longer on one side. My point is, if you're ploughing the land, you're gonna make a long field, not a square one. Second point is that if rectangular is supposedly as arbitrary as square, then why did we end up with square? There is this other game called Age of Empires and a bunch of people think 0AD a clone of it (it isn't, I know). If the shape is arbitrary anyway, isn't it a no-brainer to choose the shape that is different from that other RTS-heavyweight everyone compares us to? You know, just to not rub it in how similar they look on the surface? Euhm.. Personally I'm not a fan of removing structures from an already limited list, at all.. Also, what happens to all the techs? They also go to the CC? Training traders at the CC? Removing the market places makes for an even staler economic gameplay... Also, what you're saying definitely doesn't apply universally, and even where it does, there were still "regular" marketplaces in smaller towns. Also, because commerce was conducted near the administrative centers, doesn't mean that the marketplace and the administrative buildings were literally synonymous with each-other. Some of 0AD's market places (like those of the Kushites) don't really represent a single structure, but a gathering of traders, which is what a market essentially is. A place where traders gather, and they gather at many other places than agoras.

Also, farms should really be rectangular, like the great majority of farmlands in the real world. Like 50% larger on one side. They'd look a lot more natural, and the increased size will make them a little awkward to place in the middle of town. About the shape of the field: when ploughing a field, you ideally want to plough as long as you can in one direction. Ploughing is incredibly hard (even when using draft animals), and "an object in motion tends to remain in motion along a straight line unless acted upon by an external force", which means every turn requires a lot of energy, which in turn means that ploughing a longer, rectangular field is a lot less intensive than ploughing a square field of the same surface area, which would require a lot more turns. Third MAJOR advantage of rectangular field, is that it's a quick, easy and obvious visual distinguishing feature from Age of Empires' square fields. The square fields thing is such a weird yet iconic AoE -thing that it contributes to the image of 0AD being an AoE clone. This small visual distinction can have a big subconscious influence on how the game is perceived (more independent form AoE, not scared to do things differently/more realistic/better).

Have you ever been to a farm? Or have you ever been to the center of any town or city anywhere in the world? lol, sorry... I just really hope that 0AD can breath new life into the RTS genre by getting rid of those stale 90's conventions, instead of dogmatically adhering to them. It's time for some new and revamped formulas. Not the same old, same old logical fallacies. 0AD can and should be much more than just glorified nostalgia (I know it already is, but we can do better, even with minor changes here and there). Triggers me every time... Farms belong on the outskirts while markets belong in the center! How does this not upset you? lol...

@Lion.Kanzen

What do you think of this idea as a new game mode. A game mode called Diplomacy where there is no chat box but to communicate with other players you have to build diplomats and couriers to send messages to other players. It would function like sending each other notes. I think this would be a really cool addition the game. You would start the game neutral to all other players and teams would be unlocked of course. also make sure that it can be mixed with other modes like Nomad Regicide wonder and relic victories as well.

Formation first has to turn towards point is going to move. Link: turnsBeforeMove

I checked the buildings from the Celtic factions and in general there is no big trouble. The only thing is the overwhelming occurrence of round shields and britonic shields on gallic buildings. It should be nice to replace them by oval shields which are the emblematic shield in the gallic art. Maybe some farming tools and others common items could be interesting to enhance the buildings. The forge/blacksmith have a fire and a chimney that are not really accurate historically but it is maybe excessive to change them. If you are motivated here some pictures: Outside the temple and the tavern that should be changed, I think the Civic-Center (actually labelled Caer) could be improved. I have the feeling that this building look too much like a market or a shop. I suggest to keep the main structure, to remove the foods, the showcases and the displays. I suggest to color a part of the facade of the building with the color faction and to add some discrete patterns/motifs. I like the idea of the portique and we could add on each side of the main door two wooden statues against the wall.

Heard this in the film "Extinction" on Netflix.

I personally don't really agree with that. An unbalanced multiplayer game can last as little as 5 min, and even games with opponents with matching skill-levels rarely last more than 30 min (correct me if I'm wrong). The most fun MP games though, IMO can last anywhere from 30 min to an hour (even more), but much more than that becomes tedious if no-one has a clear upper hand. 0AD is a very beautiful game with a lot of details that easily go unnoticed, and the true depth and beauty of the game can never be appreciated in 10 min matches. If anything, a slightly bigger focus on city-building and economy would be ideal, so that 0AD won't be just another classic RTS, that's fun for a while, but becomes boring and repetitive after many plays. Overly streamlining, simplifying or speeding up the game would only be "beneficial" to obsessive MP-gaming, which is one of the things that actually killed classic-RTS in the first place (for most people at least). 0AD finally adds a little more depth, or at least the potential for adding more depth to a genre that has otherwise been considered to have become a relatively stale one. I don't think most people want the game to be more like Company of Heroes, Command&Conquer, Sins of a Solar Empire and Starcraft. I think most people just want to build an epic "little" historical kingdom with an epic "little" historical army, and fight epic "little" (not necessarily historical) battles of survival and conquest. Not send 4 guys over to the enemy at min 3, kill some of his women and claim victory... I would mostly agree with this, so would many others. I think the build radius from your first CC is ok as it is though, the main issue is that the precious resources are literally in front of the door. Because those cozy little square field are also built right next to the CC, there is very little risk involved in farming as well. If the fields were rectangular (larger), and farms were a pre-requisite for building them (maybe a penalty for farming in the town centre), you'd have to build them further out, and think more carefully about where to place them and how to defend them. A whole new level of strategy and tactics right there. Would also benefit raiding.. lol! But seriously though, we just need some regular villagers for economy only. The civilian aspect of the game is lacking, and it would offer an awesome opportunity to showcase more of civilization's culture. Maybe even selectively ranking villagers: peasant ⟶ artisan ⟶ aristocrat, with different specialities... Citizen soldiers should remain, but they should be more supplemental than being the main economy unit. I think most people would agree with this (?) Yes to all of that... It would be really nice to assign workers to worksites, rather than resources... e.g. build a lumber camp, assign workers to the lumber camp instead of the trees themselves. Now gather rates are tied specifically to the lumber camp, tree density within its radius, and the amount of workers assigned, instead of being determined by the distance each and every individual worker has to move between the resource and dropsite and how efficiently they move. This would remove the most annoying type of microing in my opinion, and allows players to focus on other more fun parts of the game including base building and military manoeuvres. There could be two options at the lumber camp: 1) clear forest, (large one-time income of wood leading to total deforestation within the lumber camp radius), 2) slow & steady trickle (forest management, forest regenerates at the same rate it's being gathered, bringing in a slow but constant trickle of wood). Also, keep it simple, by giving lumber camps a large radius. Build a mine (only one slot per ore), assign workers to the mine, resource rate of the mine is limited by how many workers are assigned. Alluvial deposits can provide a modest one-time income of stone or metal, not too far the original CC, but definitely further than mines are now. Larger deposits mined from pit or shaft mines outside of the starting territory could provide a permanent trickle of metal, once again, with an income rate determined by how many workers are assigned to the mine (and not by how efficiently or not workers move around the obstruction box of the stone or metal deposit). This would be a great incentive to expand. I'm not very technical, but this could mean that menial economy tasks could be represented by "simple" animation-loops tied to the work-site (especially for mines), and potentially help improve performance as paths don't need to be constantly calculated (?).