Leaderboard

Step 1: Entity does not see terrain higher than its position. [done] Step 2: Entity does not see terrain behind hills [done] Step 3: Entity height influences how high can see (height from outpost's footprint allows to see what is on the hill) [maybe better to use some new parameter than footprint ? ] Step 4: Performance [maybe will not be needed] Last build version Windows: pyrogenesis.exe (outdated version) Related diff: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1905

Don't get me wrong, since a stable balance mod already exists, we might as well use it. I think what Darc and I are saying is the team itself shouldn't bother with balance and should prob focus on features. If modders want to make balance mods, then more power to them. Just be prepared to rebalance whenever a new feature is introduced.

I agree here and have agreed in the past. We used to tag team that point together. I was just referring to minor balance fixes such as finally fixing annoying things like battering ram behavior and slinger spam. It shouldn't take an act of Congress to do that. A full balance overhaul should wait until after gameplay features have all been implemented, pathfinding fixed, etc.

I think if borg can improve balancing now and he is willing and able to spend the time, that's a great idea. Changing core mechanics takes time, and it will make the game more interesting to play in the meantime. So, even if everything will change again in the future, the effort will not be wasted.

It appears to me some people enjoy the game, so I would not say this is an absolute fact. One can also create an almost perfect AoE 2 clone, which is a good game, purely by editing templates. Now, regardless of what the team will decide on balancing, I would like to say that borg has worked hard on his mod to make something that (it seems) people like, and that is a valuable achievement, which we should all recognise and applaud.

Thanks, I didn't want we stay on misunderstanding ;-)

To go back to the topic question "Are there balancing changes planned for A 24?" Yes there are balancing changes planned. @borg- Can you make a version of your mod compatible with SVN ?

so you guys are gonna finally get around to removing the graphics engine? I've been waiting for text prompt based 0 A.D. for years!

refs: https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP19952 https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP20521 https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP20603

Actually I think we should distinguish between: content (actors, animations, icons, maps, sounds, etc.), which have to be up to the art department's standards features, which require serious reviews from the programming team to ensure code doesn't have unintended consequences balance tweaks (e.g. how much health a structure has, unit attack damage, which entities are available to which faction in which phase, etc.); these happen occassionally, as @fatherbushido pointed out, but not frequently enough, according to many people on these forums (There are other things, of course, but those matter less to gameplay.) Mods can really help to test things; however, the more things a mod does, the harder it'll be to get it implemented; hopefully @borg-'s mod will result in a number of small patches that'll be accepted on phabricator and committed to the game.

Well, the main question always was : how is the game supposed to be played? All the current features ingame are not glued together. They're taken from AoE II and other games and combined roughly to represent "something" which isn't clear. Gameplay balancing can only work when the game is in a stable version and the basic gameplay decisions are set. Which includes (simplified): - how much is the balance economy/warfare (in terms of player micro) - how detailed is the economy setup/how do map control elements work - how much is tactical/strategical micro - how is the basic counter system/tech tree (shared tech tree or unique tech trees for each faction) - which factions are included and how unique are they designed - etc. I just pulled those out of thin air, there are probably a lot of other points with even higher priority EDIT: Nescio put some nice points: edit2: these @#$%ing quote mechanics, half my post is gone... fck this.

@Sundiataif you refers to my post, it wasn't my intention. On my side I really don't care. I just brought some elements which I thought could be helpful in understanding things globally.

I have no problem with this because it effects Delenda Est not at all. I haven't bothered playing Vanilla much since nothing interesting has happened to the core mechanics in many years. I started DE on my own to change that. Only problem for me is that "balance" isn't what keeps me from playing Vanilla, the lack of new features does. But if better balance will keep other people playing and contributing, then that is a win. It's not like borg is neglecting his battalions and SSAO patches in favor of working on his balance mod...

There was different organization (one head, committee, ...). The last official info about wfg I have is that it was decided at 2014-08-03 (see meetinglogs) to agree on merging the balancing branch of one member and to open a poll to give him the head of the gameplay balance. I didn't find public results of that poll. But it was kinda implicit that he was in charge of that. I remember asking agreement before committing balancing changes, then don't asking him (sorry for that). So did other members. (We most of the times used forum, irc, trying to fight against our own biases or not, grepping opinions or not, phabricator also). I had asked several times clarification about that. Due to past issues about that (see commit history above) and to other facts, there was an implicit conservation policy about committing balancing change. I assume he is still in charge of that as I didn't see any announcement about that (or I missed it). On the last 5 years, grepping for balance in commit message: r15644: Surprise. 100% brand new rebalance for every unit in the game, after lengthy discussion with Enrique. r15655: Revert Surprise commits by Mythos_Ruler, r16447 and r16444 following team decision. They will be put in a separate git branch. This is done to avoid conflict with scythetwirler's balance branch and potential other work in that area. r15713: Gameplay rebalance after a long period of testing and rebalancing. See https://github.com/scythetwirler/0ad for details on changes. r15728: Petra: some tunings in tech research following the merge of balance branch r16285: Balance branch merge. r16302: Hero balancing. r16305: Petra: some tweaks for new ranges from balance brabnch r16331: Siege balancing. r17882: Limit arrows on certain buildings and ships. Patch by sanderd17, fixes #3196. Balancing by elexis, reverts r16776 in favor of the new total arrow limit. r18157: Balance garrisoned regeneration rate as proposed by mimo and scythetwirler. Reduce rate in village phase from 10 to 5. Increase town phase addition from 2 to 7 and city phase addition from 1.5 to 9. r18248 : Unique building aura balancing, refs #3930 Owning multiple libraries and theatrons increases the aura bonus proportionally, so as to incentivize capturing. Make the library aura more appealing by giving a 10% research time bonus. Improve a tooltip. r18249: Balance hellenic champions. Double the metal cost of elite spartan citizen soldiers, as they have stats near those of champions. Use a more reasonable cost for age 2 champions. Differentiate the armored swordsmen from the other sword champions by actually increasing it's armor. r18255: Balance the wonder and improve unique building tooltips. Increase the armor of buildings following r18045. Triple the research time for the population tech, as it is the most powerful tech in the game. Mention that unique building auras stack. Fix a bad tooltip in pop_wonder.json. r18402: Trireme and bireme ship balancing. The mauryan empire is not known to have the strongest fleet, so reduce their ships hitpoints to the average for that model. Redue bireme metal cost to make it an actual alternative to the trireme, considering population cost and hitpoints. Remove a hardoded linenumber in a comment. r18528: Ram garrison balancing. Garrison up to 10 men in rams and 12 in persian ones, in order to have a greater chance of attacking enemies with many melee champs defending, since the new balancing in alpha 21 requires siege engines to destroy buildings, see r18037 and r18045. Remove undocumented garrisoned healrate of rams introduced in r11292. That commit introduced it in many places, which were removed in later commits. Leave the positive garrisoned healrate of ships and special buildings for now, assuming that there are supplies on ships (but not in rams). Add garrisoned healrate tooltips in the following commit. r18550: Tree balancing of the red sea map. Sometimes players didn't have any wood close by while usually all players have practically limitless wood around. Reported by sentado. Thus enforce greater distance between big forests and add some tiny forests in between them. Keep a big distance between all forests as it is supposed to be a desert. r18555: Mediterranean tree balancing. Increase minimum distance between forests so as to carve more space for player buildings. Reported by sentado, based on patch by _kali. Adapt metal and stone mine numbers to keep the same probability. r18722: Tweaks hp modification of the phase city tech to keep the current balance as tech modifications calculations changed in r18207. r18738: Loot balancing overhaul and cleanup. Based on patch by fatherbushido, refs #4193. Add missing loot entry to many new buildings that were added after r11524 and ships. Give civic centers and wonders a significant amount. Food related structures contain some food. Temples somehow yielded 500 metal loot previously. Remove experience point loot from non-defensive buildings. Merge loot for cavalry and hero templates. Swordsmen and sword cavalry loot 5 metal, slingers 5 stone, other units 5 wood. Remove some duplicate Looter, MiniMap?, Selectable and TrainingRestriction? entries. Remove pointless sentence "Special Building." from persian hall tooltip. r18850: Tweak elephant hero stats. There were some inconsistencies with champion elephant template. Remove some hard bonuses forgotten in previous balancing commits. Reviewed by elexis. r19359: Survival Of The Fittest Overhaul r19370: Catafalque templates and auras for each civilization. Patch By: Hanibal Barca aka Hannibal_Baraq Differential Revision: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D269 Strings Reviewed By: Gallaecio Balancing Reviewed By: borg-, Grugnas Addresses few issues found by fatherbushido r19505: Roman Entrenched Army Camp balancing. r19697: Reduce slightly armor of gaul fanatic unit and make the run speed more consistent. The purpose is to balance it a bit more but also keep and emphasize the specificity of that unit. Reviewed by elexis. Differential Revision: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D569 r19885: Women Attack balancing fixes. r20363: Tweak a bit citizen cavalry costs. Follow the same infantry vs cavalry policy as for champs and heros. Motivations are: infantry vs cavalry consistency (from the abstract unit role point of view), preventing some unbalances, enforcing a more realistic infantry vs cavalry ratio in game. Accepted by: Nescio, Grugnas Differential Revision: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D983 r21477: Kushite tweaks and balancing Add an anti-champ/hero bonus to Meriotic Temple Guards. Make the Temple of Amun a unique building available in the City phase. Adjust some auras and add one for cheaper triremes. Nerf clubman attack, remove spearmen tweaks. Change barracks cost. Fix some icons. r21556: Implement walls on Jebel Barkal, beautify the map, improve the trigger script and add stables/cavalry attckers, refs #5040. Balancing: Place Stables which only spawns melee cavalry which only attack traders, women and siege engines. Nerf fortresses by not exclusively spawning champions (temples still do). r21613: Don't have the difficulty of Jebel Barkal differ by the factor 10 depending on the mapsize and playercount. If there are less spawn points, the groups of spawned units is increased proportionally. The new balancing should yield the same results as a 1v1 on medium mapsize or a 4v4 on a normal mapsize in the previous balancing. Notice that the number of elephant stables (and hence elephants) can still vary. r21644: Improve Jebel Barkal balancing for smaller maps when there are very few or no elephant stables. r21672: Add some small bushes near the straggler trees on Lower Nubia to try to improve the imbalance between players starting on the left vs players starting on the right side of the map. And also (more complete): https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Alpha21 https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Alpha22 https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Alpha23 https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Alpha24 Obviously balancing is necessary to make a good rts. But what kind of players are you refering to? (I guess you refers to online multiplayer players?)

@wraitii My friend @nani has tested your new patch and found the problem. He has replied and uploaded the file. https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1871

But this is not the focus, I know that implementing new things is time-consuming and requires a lot of dedication from people, and I know everyone here works hard. I mean it's more about the overall balance/changes/gameplay of the game with what we have at the moment. A simple example, the units when they increase their rank they become invincible for a few seconds which completely ruins the balancing. I changed it by removing only one line from the code. It was extreamly simple and effective, but will this be a change to the a24? Probably not, because no one is looking at this.

I understand, but there is no fixed team, we are all collaborators, so i'm willing to change that. It would not need a lot of people, just someone to help me and review and minor adjustments, since we have practically everything already ready in the mod. I created the mod for elexis orders, and it was thought from the outset to be implemented in the game. It was not a mod set up to be a mod, it's just the best way to test and get feedback, which is unquestionably very positive.

This is true too, but what keeps the community alive is the multiplayer games, and you see most of the players playing the vannila version just because it's easier. And whether you like it or not, vanilla is 0a.d's identity. It is for this version that people will look when they judge the game good or bad. The mods may even be bad in this sense because many have even asked themselves in the lobby, how the mods are years ahead of the original version, and are usually made by 1 or 2 guys.

I do not agree on this point. An active balancing community keeps players playing the game. A good balance keeps the fun and better reception for new players. This will attract new contributors who can help the game in many ways. 0 a.d is in a stage that needs to take this seriously. The game has been stagnant on balancing for many years. Besides that should not need many guys to do, I myself have free time and could do much of this work, it would only need someone to review small things (if the mod is accepted as part of the vanilla ofc).

My mod is made by me but based on the opinion of several players mainly high level players. The mod does not change any original game base, just a few things, like more units and constructs that are not being used in the original version. One of my main goals in mod was to keep the foundations as they are. You can see, I could have added new civilizations and make the mod even better, but I did not do that, kept the original civilizations. Could you quote me what is completely different from the current version? Moreover, I have not said that the mod should be implemented exactly as it is now even because it is undergoing constant changes with the help of the players. You have to understand that the balancing is much deeper than you think, it's not just coming and changing the status of the units that everything will be perfect. There are several issues in the current version of the game that should be taken into account.

Okay, I got hold of a Raspberry Pi 3. There's now an experimental Gallium VC4 driver for the Broadcom VideoCore4 graphics chip in this device. OpenArena runs perfectly as you might expect as it is a common test case and complete. Anyway, there was 0.A.D in the Raspbian repository, albeit an old version, so I thought why not give this a go? It runs! At least through the menus, when you try to load a map it complains in the terminal about GL errors (this is with all effects disabled and quick and ugly water selected and closes. Not bad though eh? The open source driver that I'm using here supports desktop OpenGL 2.1 according to glxinfo as well as OpenGL ES. However I believe the hardware does not support S3TC and only supports... EGL? Whatever the compression Android uses is. Just thought I'd leave this here for someone to enjoy. Kind regards.

Perhaps if this feature was limited to static objects like buildings then it could remain relatively performant.

fire reloading is more intimidating. must be have less range.... but only a expert can say that.

Cleopatra is a bit overpowered and the animation looks unrealistic, but on an unrelated note, as far as I know, it was very real for professional archers to shoot several times per second. I remember seeing a documentary where a professional could hit three moving discs thrown at once in different directions. We are affected by pseudo-historic movies, but it was pretty impressive what ancient soldiers could do. Of course, they would usually hold (and sometimes also shoot) multiple arrows at once for a fast repeat time. </offtopic>

Actually, the initial goal was just hard-counter, that's where all the problem came up. The game has severe balancing problems on almost everything, it's not just about changing status like attack, armor, and that's it. I had to change many other things for the counter system to work. As the feedback was very positive I decided to continue the work, giving more dynamics and depth to the game, including many bad things, with the technological tree for example, which is super outdated, or heroes archers as cleopatra that if I fail the memory has an attack speed of 0.3, totally out of balance and realism (every 1 second she attacks 3 times, almost 4), I'd say idiot. Just a few examples of what I've seen and changed. I say for sure, if you make only minor adjustments it will not work.

The disabling TLS fix If you really want to help us get to the bottom of the crashes you are experiencing you could 1. Clone the dev version at the A23 revision 2. Install Visual Studio 2013 3. Update workspaces in build/workspaces/ 4. Build the game (Optionnal but recommended) 5. Launch every game you play through visual studio and give us the call stacks every time the game crashes Maybe it's a stupid bug that can be fixed.

I think the game is doing great. My only worry in terms of Pyrogenesis is performance (pathfinder). The rest can be modded, the game is already on the level of other RTSs done by multi-million dollar corporations. About balance, I agree with borg, even if there is still some engine changes, the game has to be always as balanced as possible. Every alpha has to incorporate balance changes according to the feedback of the best players, don't need to be anything revolutionary, but there are some points that everyone agrees with: buff archers (a lot) and cavalry (a bit), nerf slingers, etc.

Too bad I have too much things to do. Maybe @LordGood would like to do it

Thanks, got it working. All we both need now is a variety of merc camp models, eh? {civ} didn't used to work that way, and in fact didn't work that way the last time I tried making mercs like this, but now it does. Probably has for a while, just never got around to trying it again.

Yes, {civ} is the owner's, {native} is the unit's; see the links fatherbushido posted.

With certainty!!!

Also I believe that Hyrule Conquest has a shockwave effect. See the video in the thread here

So I tried to see if it could work. As expected repository version is out of date, and crashes. Trying the compilation route instead, with the SVN version. Compilation... okay Use: $ sudo apt-get install build-essential libboost-dev libboost-filesystem-dev \ libcurl4-gnutls-dev libenet-dev libgloox-dev libicu-dev \ libminiupnpc-dev libnspr4-dev libnvtt-dev libogg-dev libopenal-dev \ libpng-dev libsdl2-dev libvorbis-dev libwxgtk3.0-dev libxcursor-dev \ libxml2-dev subversion zlib1g-dev You'll need to install Cmake if you use the built-in NVTT. $ apt install cmake If you want to be able to build you will need to use a swap file, especially if you want to use multiple threads. Else you'll get c++ internal compiler error killed (program cc1plus) raspberry pi To do so (You'll need to do it at every restart): $ sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/swapfile1GB bs=1M count=1024 $ sudo mkswap /swapfile1GB $ sudo chmod 0600 /swapfile1G $ sudo swapon /swapfile1GB Lib-sodium is outdated so you'll need to build it yourself. To do so: $ wget "https://download.libsodium.org/libsodium/releases/libsodium-1.0.16.tar.gz" $ tar xfvz libsodium-1.0.16.tar.gz $ cd libsodium-1.0.16/ $ ./configure $ make $ make install In my case it wasn't detected after building 0ad so I had to add $ sudo ldconfig After that the game will run. If you use the default drivers you will get a warning. I tried with the two others, but there is no difference between the last two. The game will segfault in the matchmaking window, before reaching it Here is the trace in GDB: @fabio It would seem the option renderpath = fixed Should be removed from the game. You have to carefully disable all the options or it will crash the game on other platforms, and it's incredibly slower than the rest. nos3tc = true Didn't seem to have any influence (maybe the game crashed more easily), but I guess i would only have seen it in the game. Atlas doesn't load either, and send a huge number of warnings in the background. It would seem to be a memory issue, but since it works with under 512MB Ram when not in the game I guess something else is at work here. I'll try with SM45 to see if it fixes it.

For start I plan only depending on terrain height and entity height. For example: towers will have bonus and will see over hills that are lower then their height. It could work with structures if their height would be added / substracted to terrain height in some cache to avoid obstruction checking when updating visibility.

Not to discourage you but the chances that we commit something that changes gameplay in such a way is low at the moment. In my opinion, these need a physics manager that handles collisions in c++, something that we will also need for unit pushing.

That's the hard part...

Thats Nice! Could it work with structures too? using height for make tall structures block vision behind them. Example: Infantry can't see whats behind the walls unless they are in a siege tower. Stupid question: if i garrison an archer in a outpost would it increase their FOV by Step 3 or it would just affect when entity is in a hill.

The title of thread is: "Are there balancing changes planned for A24?"
 Instead of discussing this, the thread is becoming another hack and slash on 0AD's flawed gameplay mechanics. That's not what this thread was about and that's not what borg's mod is about. Obviously the one affects the other, but they're separate subjects. There are glaring balance issues that have little to do with gameplay, but which affect the enjoyability of competitive matches. Battering ram shenanigans. Slinger spam. Only 3-4 civs are played competitively. Underused units. etc. Borg is not a master of C++ to my knowledge. He is one of the best, or the best players out there and he has a lovely demeanor as well. He helps and teaches people how to play. He has used his experience and his skillsets to improve the balance of the game, with the stated intention of addressing many of the issues that many players have brought up repeatedly. If a team of experienced players commit to playtesting the mod and ironing out potential flaws, then we're looking at a tangible improvement in one aspect of the game. WHICH IS A GOOD THING. Regardless of whether it addresses core gameplay issues. That's a different subject, handled by different people with a different expertise. Borg's balance mod has been hugely constructive in terms of addressing some of the recurring issues that competitive players, as well as single players have complained about. Try to do your best to facilitate and improve on his productiveness!
 As for gameplay, don't get me wrong, I think 0AD can do way better. And we should actively try to overhaul (parts of) it. Unlike what some people say, 0AD is loads of fun. Otherwise none of us would be here. But it could be a lot better. Our biggest problem is lack of manpower. This is obvious. But some of the discussions on gameplay do little to inspire people to work on it. Quite the opposite. Even if I had the skills, which I don't, I'd be very hesitant to put my hand in this wasp nest. I had recently actually typed more than 4 pages of condensed suggestions for 0AD, thought through over a period of several months, many of which address gameplay one way or the other, but decided not to write it out and share it because it was obvious to me at the time that every capable person is already buried neck-deep in work. A lot of things that aren't immediately noticeable to the end user but are necessary, and often boring tasks just to keep this project going. Then my computer flipped out on me and I lost all my brilliant and not so brilliant suggestions (a sign, perhaps?). Anyway, my point is basically, learn C++ and javascript if your passion lies with improving gameplay mechanics. Seriously, we need the people! Be brave, put in the work, even if nothing comes out of it. That's the risk, and always will be. But at least you might actually learn something in the process, and inspire a more capable person to pick up the cause, or support you efferts. If you're not willing to put in the work, try to find people who are, outside of the small and already overworked pool of talented, yet under appreciated contributors. Scour forums of programmers and game-developers for capable and willing individuals. Talk to capable people in your environment, or make some publicity for 0AD on Youtube/social media, with the intention of "recruiting" people. We need people that understand what free and open source means. People that have the strength to walk the whole nine yards. Not more people that have pages of suggestions but can't do anything about it themselves and expect it to just be done, like a teenager that never folds the laundry but always has a closet full of fresh, clean clothes, and never even thinks of where they came from. @DarcReaver I agree whole heartedly that 0AD shouldn't try to be another AoE clone. But deciding what it shouldn't be is a lot easier than deciding which one of the infinite other possibilities it should be. Reaching a consensus seems to be one of the hardest things in the process. It's obvious that we all have our own ideal RTS in our mind, and it's also obvious that our definitions of ideal RTS are wildly divergent. We're all going to have to make compromises somewhere. But it shouldn't feel like a sacrifice. We need to develop a shared vision, in order to manufacture consent for our ideas. We need to foster good relations, first and foremost, because the most valuable resource to our disposal is the human resource. People need to want to work on something, not be made to feel inadequate, even though mountains have been moved over the past few years. I'm not saying you need to sweet talk anyone, just recognizing the work that has been done so far (I remember a time when 50 units would lag out the game, there were only a handful of civs, no walls, no MP, barely any gameplay at all... A complete mess, basically) [Pause Writing: there are pigs on the land! The same ones that had me up last night wondering if I'm being burglarized... Going to chase them away now. Update: The pigs are hostile! I repeat, THE PIGS ARE HOSTILE! Sending in the dogs... Hmmm, the dogs made the pigs bleed... Good! (Don't worry, the pigs are fine, just shaken) Bye Bye pigs. Doggos get some nice fish as reward. Good boys End Pause] Yes, I love art, history (antiquity in particular), variety, the ability to build a town, raise an army, murder the living daylights out of my opponents, or fight for survival. Those things make the game compelling to me, as for many others. Yes, the gameplay can be a little lackluster sometimes, but baby steps man, baby steps. It's only been about 15 odd years or so, give it some time, jeez Just kidding... Like I said, we need manpower. Without the right people with the right skills, we're going to be having these kind of discussions for many years to come. It's not as simple as just deciding what to do. Someone has to actually do it. And without pay, that might take a while. Also, just because the game isn't progressing as fast in the areas you'd like it to be progressing doesn't mean that there hasn't been stellar evolution in the quality, stability, performance and art of the game.. Not a personal attack, just a general observation. Obviously you do And that's not a bad thing. My point is, just to do what you can do. If you don't want to anymore, that's fine. But try to keep the criticisms constructive. 0AD and Wildfire Games forum are large communities. Even if we don't see eye to eye on some topics, there's always a myriad of other items we can work on, together, or separate. It doesn't matter how, as long as it mutually benefits us, there's reason to continue working on the project and sharing our progress as well. I see you're still around helping people here and there, so again, not necessarily a personal comment, just a general sentiment.

If I understand correctly, the design document as listed on trac is quite outdated, so it seems the idea is to create a new one that's hosted separately ( http://docs.wildfiregames.com/design/ ), first making it descriptive of the current situation, afterwards prescriptive for future direction (at least that's my impression; please correct me, @Itms). I don't expect any major overhauls, though.

Nowadays there is AoE 2 HD, AoM : EE and AoE 2 DE in the makings you already have 2 superior clones of AoE 2 on the market, supported and published by major game companies along with superior graphics. So there no longer is a need for another AoE clone since the base products are vastly superior in every aspect at this point. But at least "we want to make 0 AD an Age of Empires clone" would state a goal/vision for the finished game. If you cannot compete with ideas of your own - steal them and work on improving small details to smoothen the template. Altough I sort of doubt you're capable of that because it could have happened 10 years ago/the core gameplay could've been centered around this. I'm also quite sure the base community would be larger by a multitude if that was the case. AoE 2 HD has a player base of more than 10k people at all times. about the "community enjoying the game" I heavily suspect that most of the people "enjoy the game" for reasons that have nothing to do with the gameplay itself. They either like that their favorite faction is in the game or that you have unit Y available, not because the game itself is compelling. As an example for external feedback I only ever saw people on YT creating content for 0 AD who said "alright this looks pretty" "okay some XXX here and there", then some battling/skirmishing and afterwards I've never seen them play the game again on their channel. Sure - some players only present unique videos per game, but there are others who have a pool of games to choose from and play those from time to time during their streams/videos. For all those "pool players" 0 ad never made it into their game pool, for reasons unknown (or maybe known?). As a random sidenote: my RTS mates which I invited to play 0 ad with me all stated "oh well it looks nice but it's boring".

I'm not sure that's better. It's like removing game features because they don't work as expected instead of fixing them. If you push it hard enough it's like saying we should remove the graphics engine because it doesn't work on some platforms

This discussion is weird. There's serious balance issues with the game. Borg made a balance mod to address these issues. Big success, no negative feedback. Help Borg implement those balance changes that don't affect core gameplay/historicity etc. in the vanilla game. If you're unhappy with the balance changes, then comment something substantive on what you'd like to see changed and why. This discussion is turning into borg having to defend why he improved gameplay. It's making me cringe... Don't behave like an autoimmune disease.

--------- try disabling Glsl graphics or post processing graphics in options menu.

I feel a bit responsible for balancing, I feel like I should do something, so I did the mod. I've been here since the first day of the lobby, I've taught most of the current players to play, I've tried to do my best to keep the community active during those years, and it's clear to the players how that "abandonment" in the gameplay makes everyone upset. Most forum People never entered the lobby, but I as an active player can say for sure, that many players have abandoned 0a.d because of balancing, and a lot of these guys were talented art and coders. well, that's just my opinion on this of course.

without some youtubers and publicity probably died faster than you thought. Justus and me are here before multiplayer were a thing. multiplayer lobby appears in A 15.

I haven't figured out how to make units trainable by all civs (such as a unit trainable from a captured merc camp) be able to build the owner's correct buildings. Have you figured this out yet? I'm not sure it's possible without making a version of every merc for every civ (an explosion in the number of templates).

Position: Front and Backend 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 I DO! Do you agree to distribute all your work for Wildfire Games under Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license? Yes Are you sure you are not wanting to work on something programming related? (Then you don't need to send in an application form.) I don't really get this question I'm learning python3.6... I like programing and I'd like to learn more! Name: Bence Rigó (Red Sky) Email: benedettorigo@protonmail.com Location: Europe Hungary Availability: How many hours per week on average do you think you'll have for Wildfire Games? What about 6 months from now? 18 hours / week... Age: 21 Occupation: Stundent but I might start to work in a few week time in a part time job Skills and Experience: Well I'm learning python3.6 I have no other skills I comed to learn! Motivation: RTS games are my favorites... I'm a huge fan of The Lord Of The Rings Battle For Middle Earth series... Age of Empire, Empire Earth... Sins Of a Solar Empire... etc... I'd like to be part of a community which develops games likes these because my first video game was The Lord Of The Rings Battle For Middle Earth 2... I love coding and programing and I'd like to learn more about these stuffs... Even though I have only Python Skills I'm ready to learn new programing languages because of the development! Personality: Well I guess I'm a massive Nerd I remember when I was younger I could spend days on a game creating my own mapps. Now I learn programing in order to create a new virtual world. Short Essay: My friend recommended this project to me because I was trying to get a group to start creating an RTS game! I'm looking for knowledge and skill developments in terms of game costuming. My motivation is to make a game which helps to build community and gives a fun and great gaming experience with a cool story. Interests and Hobbies: Well in my free time I'm usually at home playing games or learning something new by online courses. I don't often play games nowadays because it takes a lot of time.. That's why I have decided to make games... I mean why should I play if I could create a whole virtual reality with a nice community? I usually upload programming to this youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIYfz3yaGydlI2oDD4NDj2Q?view_as=subscriber. But it's a clearly new channel so I haven't got a lot uploaded yet.. Staff: I won't think so! Community: Steam, Facebook groups, Youtube, Twitch etc... As I mentioned earlier nowadays I don't play often... I got a quite old PC with DDR2 ram which I only use for coding... I mostly just watch videos about games... Favorite Game: Warthunder, Sins Of a Solar Empire, BlackLight Retribution, Day Z, PubG, Rainbow, Battle For Middle Earth 1-2 and Rise of the Witchking... Naruto games by BANDAI... Perfect Dark Zero (XBOX360 game)... Arma 3, Empire Earth, Age Of Empire, Total War series....Command Conquer Generals Zero Hour.. I got many more Work Examples: Well in the Battle For Middle Earth 2 world builder I created a few maps which were quite good for multi players. I'm still new in programming which means I have not a lot of experience but literally I have nothing but time...

I just want to let you guys know that I'm already working on the "Great Bronze Athena" statue. I'm still trying to get pose and proportions right from every angle. Once done, I'll start sculpting. It'll probably take me some time to finish it all but we'll have a great statue at the end.

That's pretty darn cool... Are you sure it's best to just spawn resources like that on arrival? Wouldn't it be better for the resource trickle to go directly to the player that controls the trade post. If nobody controls the trade post the camel just passes? Anyway, really cool job! I'm sure @wowgetoffyourcellphone might be interested in implementing something like that on some of his new maps...

Ghostbusters!