Leaderboard

I have already been experimenting with giving the game a much needed update to the terrain textures. I have been exclusively using assets from this website here, licensed as cc0: CC0 Textures - Public Domain PBR Materials We could contact this gentleman and ask for his assistance in creating new assets if his site currently does not have them and WFG could even become a Patron (his highest Patreon level is $5/month). Even if we don't try to partner with him, we can still utilize his excellent CC0 assets and ask him to check out how we're using his stuff. cough I am very keen now on using CC0 or CC-BY-SA materials. eh hem. And so far the results have been better than I'd hoped. EXAMPLES India: Desert (using assets from the India biome) Alpine-Polar (I think these 2 should be combined) Pros for updating the terrains: The game's current terrains are inconsistent in quality and scattershot in style. A new set of terrains can unify the quality and style. Terrains take up a massive amount of screen space, or what the player sees, so improving them gives a large boost in visual quality. The current terrains don't fully take advantage of the graphics engine's capabilities. A new set of terrains can do that. Improving the terrains can bring the look of the game closer to modern expectations. We can reduce the sheer number of terrains by half, which comes with the benefit of visual consistency and ease of use for mappers. Cons for updating the terrains: It will take considerable effort and take attention away from other possible tasks. The new textures will be on average 4x larger than the existing textures and will add normal maps and spec maps where previously there were few. Will increase the graphics memory load and possibly push out those with low-spec computer rigs. ?

This sounds really promising, I'll certainly try it out later! Looking at https://github.com/eserlxl/Arch-AI/tree/master/simulation/ai/arch-dev , it seems you basically took Petra's files and improved them to create your own version, i.e. yours does not need Petra to work, correct? Have you considered making your AI compatible with the svn development version (A24)? One minor thing, 0 A.D. is released under the GPLv2 licence, which means anything can be reused and rereleased under the same or later licence. However, the reverse is strictly speaking not true: GPLv3 files can't be used by 0 A.D. You released your files under GPLv3, which is perfectly fine, but it means they can't be legally incorporated into the public mod.

You mean historically? Spoked-wheel war chariots spread throughout most of Eurasia during the Bronze Age (second millennium) and dominated the battlefields, and though declining in importance after the introduction of cavalry in the Iron Age (first millennium), they continued to be used in 0 A.D.'s timeframe. In China specifically chariot dominance peaked during the Spring and Autumn period (c. 771–481 or 403 BC; cf. Sun Tzu's The Art of War). During the Warring States period (c. 481 or 403–221 BC), massed infantry equipped with crossbows became a dominant army feature. Under the Qin (221–206 BC) and Early or Western Han (206 BC – AD 9) war chariots were gradually superseded by cavalry, though they continued to exist and be used on the battlefield, both chariot archers and chariot crossbowmen, as attested by numerous depictions, archaeological remains, and textual evidence. Under the Later or Eastern Han (AD 25–220) the situation was different, but that's outside 0 A.D.'s timeframe anyway. (I'd also like to see a Kushite chariot archer, as well as the addition of both bigae and quadrigae for Carthage, which are well attested, used on Sicily until the 3rd C BC, and probably longer by various Libyan tribes in North Africa. I believe I've requested them more than once elsewhere on these forums, but I agree it's a low priority.)

Hi again, this is my second contribution to the 0ad game, but a big one for me As I promised on the ArchMod, I've developed a new AI architecture by modifying the original Petra bot. After a long (nearly 2 months) and exhausting development and testing period, it is now ready to be shared with the fans of 0ad. I have to say that AI development is really a serious job and I have a full respect to the developers of the Petra AI. Thank you very much for your efforts to develop the Petra AI. Arch AI Pack Arch AI bots are distributed as a pack that consists 9 Arch based and 4 Petra based bots. Arch Based AI Bots Arch based AI bots use Arch AI architecture. Admiral Capitalist Communist Imperialist Mason Mercantilist Patriot Theocrat Unitary Petra Based AI Bots Petra based AI bots use the original Petra AI architecture. Imperialist Patriot Single Based Unitary Initial Release Bonus: Naval Attack + Mauyran AI can produce Support Elephants and use them effectively. Capabilities: Arch AI can defeat Petra Bot except Very High Starting resources. Arch AI can start naval attacks. Best faction for Arch AI: Mauyrans (Main faction for Arch AI development) Tips: I advice to play with ArchMod. In ArchMod, you can set handicap levels for AIs. In addition, you can start with zero resources and play different game modes. ArchMod Difficulty Support: Arch AI supports Archmod harder AI levels (Insane I-X) that are harder than Very Hard AI level. Github page of the Arch AI: https://github.com/eserlxl/Arch-AI ( I'm waiting your bug reports and feedback ) Challenge: Play against Mauyrans faction with Very Low or Zero ( ArchMod ) starting resources. Installation: You can download the latest Arch AI Pack from here. Extract the release version and copy the ArchAIPack directory to the mods directory ( ../0ad/data/mods/ ). P.S. to Developers: If you give file read/write ability to the AI like readJSON/writeJSON access from the Engine, I can develop a learning AI. I hope you will enjoy when playing against Arch AI bots

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/GameplayFeatureStatus Is more interactive than mission maps.

Hello, indeed I was AFK for a few days. Atlas is not automatically built, but one can manually start a build of Atlas on Jenkins. I did just that, and it will be committed in a few minutes once the build finishes. Any team member with a Jenkins account can do it. Right now you don't have an account Angen, but I'm sending you a PM to remedy that. Else, as far as Atlas devs are concerned, trompetin17 and wraitii have an access, even if they don't use it often due to the low activity on Atlas recently.

@Stan` @Itms @wraitii @Angen @Freagarach

Yes, the first two are. Anyway, I was not criticizing, merely pointing out that not every chariot is a war chariot. (Also, the “huge battle axe” is actually a halberd, i.e. a two-handed pole arm. In Sun Tzu's world (5th C BC), chariots had three men: a charioteer (driver), noble (archer), and servant (with a gē (dagger-axe pole arm), in case enemies got to close); although weapons had evolved under the Han, the continuity is striking nonetheless.)

still broken, we are aware of that https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP23858 although atlas is broken now since https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP23847 so we rather wait for that fix before rebuild it again for autobuild, @Itms is now mia

@user1 I'm @Pistacho_Bizarro, I was winning a game against @depdawg007 and just after he message me with a "gg" he shut down the game. I would like to report him and get my score right. Please see attach the proof of this below. Thanks! commands.txt

Maybe this is also interesting? And because I shared some post-Maurya Gandhara references in the previous post, I'll share a Gandhara model building showing a roof with a noticeable degree of continuity with the typical Maurya style roofs we also feature in-game: Reliquary in the shape of a cruciform miniature building, Gandhara Art, Shaikhan Dhri, 2nd-3rd Century AD: While at the same time, Hellenistic influences are sometimes quite overt even as late as the 3rd century AD (and well beyond) Gandhara Art, Pakistan, 3rd century. The Great Departure (Prince Siddharta, later Buddha, with his horse Kanthaka):

Ooooh, on the question of Indian turrets, I found something interesting... There is a panel from Gandhara (Charg Pate, Indian subcontinent), depicting a war elephant with turret. These kind of panels are variously dated between the 1st century BC and the 3rd century AD. I can't tell the exact date for the panel presented here, but its content is quite relevant for us. It depicts Ashoka! We can't say how far back this tradition of depicting turreted war elephants in association with Ashoka goes. Maybe it was an anachronistic one time thing, produced centuries after Ashoka, or maybe it was once a more common type of depiction with a historical tradition. Who knows? What we do know is that within a few centuries of Ashoka, we have art from the same region depicting Ashoka in association with a towered war elephant. Same panel, different picture: On the question of elephant stables, the following Gandhara panel is possibly of interest: The elephant standing in the door opening on the left might be a purely symbolical depiction, or might actually represent, or be based on a credible scene of an elephant exiting its "stables". Again, who knows? But still interesting.

^ What he said. I've made the same argument about the Chinese chariots before. 5 Primary Han Chinese references of chariot/carriages and and one Osprey illustration: Kushites not having chariots was just a compromise because they already had a very diverse roster. Personally, I don't think it matters if one faction has many different and diverse, but mediocre units, while another faction has fewer, but more specialized, tanky units. It lends to different styles of play, which increases the replayability of the game, rather than it feeling like every roster is a watered down version made to conform to rigid framework. Our factions/civilzations/cultures are too diverse. Rather than pigeonholing these factions, we should further explore and exploit this diversity between the factions.

No need to apologize, I just replied to both your pull requests on github only this morning. If just renaming would be sufficient, then I assumed we might as well delete the file. I tried that and it doesn't work. Currently with the Han China mod the Han chariot works, but those from the public mod don't; deleting the Han skeleton causes those from the public mod to work again, but then the Han chariot has errors: ERROR: art/meshes/structural/han_chariot.dae: Assertion not satisfied (line 393): failed requirement "recognised skeleton structure" ERROR: Could not load mesh 'art/meshes/structural/han_chariot.dae' ERROR: CObjectEntry::BuildVariation(): Model art/meshes/structural/han_chariot.dae failed to load I assumed this means you're missing files. However, after seeing your latest post I tried your suggestion (renaming it) and you're right, it does solve the errors, both from the public chariots and the Han chariot. So somehow the file is used, but without specifying its file name. Which again proves I don't really understand how the art folder works. Anyway, I've now merged your pull request. You can delete your github branch, if you like.

Just done ...

Grand Campaing map? (gameplay)

What is a "shift system" ?

Assets. I propose that we curate the current list of biome assets, such as trees, animals and rocks, and fill in any gaps where necessary. Each biome should have: 3-5 tree species 3 or more bushes 1 berry bush object A set of eye candy rocks A set of eye candy flora 2 Stone Mines 2 Metal Mines 2 or more dangerous animals 3 or more cosmetic animals 3 or more huntable animals (not including fish) etcetera Biomes can obviously share many of the same assets (Oak Trees or Date Palms for example will be used in multiple biomes). But a new spreadsheet must be created and agreed upon to go with the new proposed terrain biomes. Also, limits should be imposed for visual consistency. For instance, no more than 5 tree species per biome. We're not going to have 10 grass terrains in a biome, so there shouldn't be 20 tree species all mixed together in that biome either. This will obviously necessitate a lot of random map script tweaking, but the final product will look very nice indeed.

Let's take stock of the current terrains situation (Alpha 23-24) Current Biomes. Inconsistent. Alpine 41 terrains 41 textures Desert 58 terrains 59 textures Mediterranean 40 terrains 42 textures Polar 17 terrains 17 textures Savanna 36 terrains 37 textures Steppe 13 terrains 13 textures Temperate 47 terrains 48 textures Tropic 32 terrains 33 textures Let's look at a potential Alpha 25 situation. Consistency. Proposed Biomes Aegean-Anatolian 18 terrains 36 textures Alpine-Arctic 18 terrains 36 textures East Asia (Bonus) 18 terrains 36 textures Equatorial Africa (Bonus) 18 terrains 27 textures Hispania-North Africa 18 terrains 27 textures India 18 terrains 36 textures Italy 18 terrains 36 textures Mesoamerica (Bonus) 18 terrains 27 textures Middle East 18 terrains 27 textures Mongolian-Tarim (Bonus) 10 terrains 15 textures Nubia-Savanna 18 terrains 36 textures Sahara 18 terrains 27 textures Steppe (Bonus) 15 terrains 30 textures Temperate-European 18 terrains 36 textures Why do some proposed biomes have 18 terrains and 36 textures, while others have 18 terrains and 27 textures? It's because they will reuse many of the same assets, specifically normal maps and spec maps. Some diffuse maps will simply be color corrected for the biome and can share normal maps and spec maps from other biomes. For example, the Alpine-Arctic biome could use the same diffuse map as the Temperate biome for a cliff texture, just color corrected for Alpine theme, and then share the same normal and spec maps between them. This saves time and effort as well as unifies the look of the complete set of terrains. (Bonus) Biomes are lower priority. For instance, if the Xiongnu are added, then the Mongolian-Tarim biome would good to add. If Scythians or other similar civs are added, then the Steppe biome would be good to add. Otherwise, these biomes could be added lastly, the others a greater priority since we have civs already in-game for these biomes.