Leaderboard

The Athenians Above: Miltiades the Younger (left), Themistocles of Athens (right) Above: Aristides the Just (left), Pericles of Athens (right) Above: General Iphicrates (left), Socrates (right) Above: Athenian Citizens (left), Greek Slaves (right) Above: Priests/Healer

The Kushites The Kingdom of Kush/The Kingdom of Meroe (Above left to right: Nastasen, Arakamani, Amanirenas, Amanitore) (Above left to right: Meroitic Citizens, Subject Peoples)

Snapping: Territory decay: Triremes: Roman army camp: Autoqueue: Carthage Sacred Band: Catapult: Embassies & Mercenary Camps Experience trickle: Fishing: Forge: Gathering: Kush Pyramids: Outposts: Palisades: Quinquereme: Resource counter: Map flare: war elephants whales Forge Formations Biomes Iberian Fireship Tresures Barracks Cavalry stables Elephant stable

The current loading screen tips are outdated, both the information, as well as with the visuals. This thread is to make new nice looking pictures and possibly also crowd check the descriptions themselves. Text: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4107 Give your comment, give better pictures.

I went out again to the hot and arid lands of my country. I went to San Marcos in the department of Choluteca. Choluteca has a terrible temperature in summer. but San Marcos is a mountainous place, many meters above sea level. The weather was 30 ° - 32 ° and at night 16 ° <Reserved space>

The trees look really nice and might have realistic size but I had the same impression like Yekaterina about the size. I think it could cause some trouble because you really don't see whats going on under the canopy (Except changing camera angel, which I believe most players wont do.). Ever fought under a treetop like this? I have the feeling players won't like this trees. Is it intended that it can be the same? Would it make (more) sense to have at least 3 different buildings? I thought about the same. A real city needs a blacksmith, a temple and a marked! Not 3 of one type of this buildings and also not any mixture of 2 of one type plus one another. However, most of the Civs need stone for the temple and stone is what u already need to go to P3. So this change might have a stronger impact then assumed. So far as I know most players avoid building a temple and prefer building a second black smith to go from P2 to P3. People should think about this and test it. It should be a future change and not as a last minute change for a25.

Better take this one out, since it's already the name of a hero.

Seleucid AINames from current (s0600204) sele.json: "Seleucus I Nicator", "Antiochus I Soter", "Antiochus II Theos", "Seleucus II Callinicus", "Seleucus III Ceraunus", "Antiochus III Megas", "Seleucus IV Philopator", "Antiochus IV Epiphanes", "Antiochus V Eupator", "Demetrius I Soter", "Alexander I Balas", "Demetrius II Nicator", "Antiochus VI Dionysus", "Diodotus Tryphon", "Antiochus VII Sidetes", "Demetrius II Nicator", "Alexander II Zabinas", "Cleopatra Thea", "Seleucus V Philometor", "Antiochus VIII Grypus", "Antiochus IX Cyzicenus", "Seleucus VI Epiphanes", "Antiochus X Eusebes", "Demetrius III Eucaerus", "Antiochus XI Epiphanes", "Philip I Philadelphus", "Antiochus XII Dionysus", "Seleucus VII Kybiosaktes", "Antiochus XIII Asiaticus", "Philip II Philoromaeus" After going through various sources, I have only identified this one from the dynasty not yet included (if I am correct - please check): Achaeus the Elder Then there are the so-called frataraka, but I am not sure if they should be considered under the Seleucids or rather under the Persians (but the further names below are not included in pers.json). According to the information at Wikipedia, the frataraka were subject to the Seleucid Empire, so I would assume we might consider adding them to the Seleucid AINames. Baydad (also spelled Bagdates), was a dynast (frataraka) of Persis from 164 to 146 BC.[1][2] Background (also from Wikipedia): See more names under: Do you think it adequate to add (all of) them to the list of Seleucid AINames? I.e.: "Achaeus the Elder", "Ardakhshir I", "Wahbarz", "Wadfradad I", "Baydad", "Wadfradad II" Another thought: Would it be "nice" (and technically possible without too much effort) to show the AINames' faces from the respective coin (if the coin images are free to use) in-game where background info is shown? I mean, when the AI has chosen its leader, maybe the coin face could be shown (like an avatar ). If this is a silly idea, please just ignore it.

Good news still on this front: I've increased the flexibility of the system so you can play with 3 more settings, and fixed an issue so it's possible to have units push each other more, so things should death ball _less_. See https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4098 which I've merged. I'll still take player input during Feature Freeze, but I expect these new settings will be overall more satisfactory.

simulation/templates/template_unit_infantry.xml file has "structures/{civ}/elephant_stable" instead of "structures/{civ}/elephant_stables" in its build list. simulation/templates/units/ptol/camelry_scout.xml has an aura of "camel_stench" which should probably be "units/camel_stench".

I've been wanting to change it for a while. Along with the page's design adding the ability to scroll through tips + for sp to wait before starting the match. There is a thread about a redesign somewhere.

For the 50th consecutive Sunday (allowing for the one that was a few days late while I was moving house) - I have a Sunday replay for y'all! We're closing in on the first anniversary of 0AD Newbie Rush, 83 videos in total so far if you include midweek games, free 4 All's, tutorials and mod features It's been fun and plenty more to come.

That is actually a good idea man

I installed the latest github version of Delenda Est Mod and I am on A25 svn. When I entered a game with the Ptolemies these errors came up: I chose Cleopatra as the hero and she couldn't be trained. Otherwise the mod looks brilliant, especially the themes and new civs. @wowgetoffyourcellphone

As mentioned on #0ad-dev, Phacility (the organisation behind Phabricator) is winding down operations, and - as of June 1st - Phabricator is no longer being maintained. Announcement: https://admin.phacility.com/phame/post/view/11/phacility_is_winding_down_operations/ Upstream task: https://secure.phabricator.com/T13654 We're self-hosted, so the only impact on us is that existing bugs, security vulnerabilities, and so on may/will remain unpatched. (They claim to no be longer accepting bug reports, and have stated a plan to decommission "Discourse", the site they prefer people use to submit reports.) There does appear to be a group that are considering forking Phabricator and continue down their own path. Very little news (as of yet) about how the "big" users (e.g. Facebook, Wikimedia, Mozilla) will be handling this. IRC where people are discussing the fork: #phabricator on libera.chat Select excerpts from the above IRC: https://d.i10o.ca/tmp/phabricator-future/ Chat room for discussions: https://temp-community-phab.zulipchat.com Shared document where things for the fork are being documented: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YxQ_JGdhWYPSdoaI_m1TLzwbGLZdtOD7ux2SVL263Ow

No, only a few instances of Spartan women rising to the occasion to defend the homeland. For instance, after the Spartan army was defeated by Pyrrhus of Epirus, the defeated Spartan men rested that night while the Spartan women built a palisade around the city to fend off Pyrrhus' army the next day.

If I select any unit or structure of any type the game crashes, with the typical error box. I disambled all mods, also i delete the cashe and i get the same error. crashlog.dmp crashlog.txt interestinglog.html mainlog.html

Yeah, you need to patch it, or wait for tomorrow.

Just the eagle itself is not OP because it has almost no attack and can be shot down easily. A unit carrying it, however, means more protection and so it is OP.

I always thought that it was three different buildings lol. I may have assumed it was like some other game (AoM?), but it actually makes more sense to me. Anyway, maybe it should be made explicit.

I agree, that would favour Carthage and Kush too much over the other civs. lol you are too underrated. check out my new rating system here: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/42429-proposal-new-rating-calculation-system/ I need you to check my maths

I build 2 blacksmith anyways to upgrade the infantry in time, before the first confrontation. But summoning the top players: @LetswaveaBook @Player of 0AD @ValihrAnt @chrstgtr @borg- What do you think about the 3 town phase buildings? Should they all be different?

Oh yes it is fine for A25 but I think A24 is missing it. Nevermind A24 will be outdated soon

They have a good mix of citizen soldiers and mercenaries, plus War Elephants. Kind of like a mix between Ptolemies and Macedonians. Republican Romans are based on the Punic Wars era (aka "Polybian era"), during the 3rd and 2nd century BC. The Imperial Romans are based on the high imperial era of the 1st and 2nd century AD.

@wraithii I appreciate your dedication, and based on their description the new parameters seem like great additions to the tool kit. I must tell you though that, in my testing, the new dials aren't producing much of a noticeable effect for me. I've even tired turning everything up to double digits, and while a few units on the edge of my groups have begun wandering around where otherwise they would remain stationary, as a group they are pretty much behaving just as before. The only parameter with a clear effect is Clearance. Forgive me for asking, but in your own testing are you sure the pushing feature is working as you intended? I think by far the most likely explanation for these discrepancies is that I managed to corrupt my test installation somehow; but there's an the off chance I might be helping you find a bug... So I thought I'd better speak up Edit: Actually looking at your screen shots on the diff, there is very clearly something not working right with my installation. I'm having teething problems with using SVN it seems. Pay me no mind.

I suppose it doesn't matter, but it seems weird that your enemy's name is Seleucus the Cowardly, while at the same time you're training him as a hero.

Did you like the new random civ options?

Honestly, I still don't have an opinion, but I believe that the name in Zapoteco is more "cool" and unique.

I really like the idea, I believe they fit well as a Xiongnu unit, by the way there was already a debate about it. However I remember that there came the idea of putting a human unit using the bird, I believe this makes it a little more "realistic" instead of a super intelligent bird.

Why is this poor kid still on A23? We need to update the apt package manager; debian-based users would still be playing A23 when A25 is out

Thinking about either adding tips for all the biomes or removing the savanna one. Opinions?

The multiplayer lobby is currently plagued by rated games being quit rather than finished resulting in artificial rating manipulation. No explanation is needed as to why this is terrible. I looked through some posts on the forums regarding the topic and some solutions and why they wouldn't work. All of them ended somewhere close to "Who actually disconnected cannot be reliably unless WFG hosts dedicated servers". Which isn't quite true. This is basically a text book Byzantine fault problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_fault. A somewhat good enough solution can be implemented into the lobby without much changes, and without dedicated servers for rated games. However, any solution to the problem would need at least 3 entities. And also, it is assumed that no more than 1/3 would be up to any shenanigans by manipulating game states and lying to the "arbitration" service. Long story short, 2 players and 1 arbiter. A proof of consensus mechanism needs to be implemented to ensure three nodes are in sync and knows what is going on. I think a decent start would be to just seed a pseudo-RNG that is deterministic with a value agreed upon at game start. Note that turn hashes cannot be used since the current value need to be computed by a bot that does not run the simulation, if turn hashes are used and mismatching values are sent, there is no way to determine which hash is correct. This isn't actually Byzantine Fault Tolerant, but that doesn't really matter since if the client kept on lying, once the game ends, the worst thing that could happen is two mismatching reports being sent to the ratings bot. However, to successfully do this would be a not so easy task if someone cared enough to do, they can just as easily implement an auto clicker to play the game. Technically, it would look like this: arbiter: Another WFG hosted lobby bot. Both players send the next RNG output to the bot, the bot queries its own RNG, and if all three values match, life is peachy. If one value doesn't match, the arbiter, and the player who sent the matching value are correct, and the other player is incorrect. How is the quitting problem solved? Once the game ends, and both players send the game reports, this information can be used to solve the trust problem. Currently, when one person quits, upon game end, only one game report is send to the ratings bot which ignores the game if both reports are not identical. With this implemented, the reports from the player who was in sync with the arbiter would be deemed correct. Can't the proof of consensus be "I am here arbiter" every Nth turn? Not really. This would allow for players to fool the arbiter even if they quit. To be fair, even this allows for it to someone who is both smart enough, and determined enough. The solution is to implement a true byzantine fault tolerant consensus method, but I genuinely think this is overkill. How hard is this to circumvent? To circumvent this. Nefarious actor needs to patch the engine to send the expected value regardless of whether they are in a game currently or not, and upon game end, send a falsified game report. To make it more tolerant as said above, a more secure consensus method has to be implemented. On the top of my head, a solution is to reseed the RNG with the simulation hash at certain intervals. Once the values get reseeded, unless the client has been computing the turn hashes, they wouldn't get the next value right. While this solves the fooling problem, it also creates a new problem. This highlights the flaw in this whole thing. If 2/3 of the system cannot be trusted, the faulty entity cannot be determined. If a game goes out of sync, there is no way to find the flaw since none of the turn hashes sent can be verified. The reseeding part relies on two players sending matching hashes. This isn't a regression per se, but its still annoying if OOSes are weaponized. Can it be more resilient? Yes, in 1999, the "Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance" algorithm came out. It is extremely fast. With this state machine, the three entities can process player commands and generate simulation tracking alternative hashes that do not depend on actually computing the simulation state. However, since there is only 3 entities, and the problem can only be solved if 1/3 or less entities are nefarious, so OOSes cannot be reliably solved. However, notice that this cannot be solved even with dedicated rated game hosting. </useless crap no one reads>

Check out the ones in the Delenda Est mod. They might be useful or applicable. Many of them don't use the new terrains and trees though, so I might have to update DE's as well.

Translation are pulled often to transifew however the strings it pulls and the translation it has are pulled about once a week into the game to limit noise.

lo mas importante esta subrayado, las lanzas mas ligeras pero afiladas y el uso de 2 soldados a caballo y como mantenían el caballo atado al suelo, asi como el uso de estribos y puñales dentro de los escudos 227-Texto del artículo-233-1-10-20110202 (1).pdf

Less but not none, because moving units can't cross through non-moving units, so chokepoint can remain relatively crowded and ultimately impassable. And their ability to be turtled and ranged by more units remain Also, conversely, artificial choke points because of bad pathfinding feel terrible. That is a good point, but the mosh pit design that we had already made this somewhat difficult. --- Overall, I agree that the pushing feature can and should ideally be tweaked and improved, but I believe the good offsets the bad. We'll see how people feel in testing.

I have played them more than twice. I would suggest the following strategy for 1v1s. What seems to be a decent opening is to create 2-3 extra starting cavalry and run around the opposing territory to see what he is doing and get some kills and idle times. It is important to keep them alive. These cavalry are not very strong, as 6 skirmishers could beat 4 spear cav. You can use the intel to play more defensive than your opponent with some good tower placement. Playing defensive is a good advice since your opponent probably has a better boom, but if you manage the cavalry well, you know what is coming and can be prepared. In p3, I think you hardly need more than 1 siege tower. That siege tower fires only 10 arrows at most and hence you don´t need to garrison more than 10 men. The siege tower is mainly to get free damage on opposing ranged troops and force the opponent to react. What the real killer should be are bolt shooters. An army with a few deployed bolt shooters is a very dangerous army, especially with Demetrios. For pike/skirm ratio, I think 50/50 is the best ratio and that would be the ideal ratio in a model where one unit is a glass cannon and the other a target dummy. You need a reserve of some melee units other than pikes to defend against rams or use your own. I would say that crossbowmen and mercenary archers can be used, if you have surplus metal, but you should make only a few of them and keep them alive as good as possible.

Generally not bad, could be a bit more symmetrical i.e. the bottom left edge could be a bit less crinkled and rounded and your version looks very handpainted with the smooth color transitions, which is a design choice, but personally I would like a bit of a light paper texture on top.

From the title, I thought it would be this:

warbird.zip Here is the mod. Only Iber and Rome have access to it for now.

A short video demonstration: 6 warbirds were used. warbird demo.webm

When are you rich in metal as a greek faction that can't expand quickly?

Proposal - Zapotec rulers of the Preclassic Period, early classic. ( AI player names) The current names are PosClasico (1300-1520), In this proposal there are only attested names from preclassic to classic (200 BC - 550 AD) It's not perfect but it's much closer. - 200 B.C. (5 Alligator) /// Chantino ///Gaayu’ Chilla - 400 A.D.- 550 A.D. (8 earthquake)///Monte Albán ///Xhono Xoo (11 Rain)///Monte Albán ///Chii ne tobi Lape (4 Alligator )///Monte Albán ///Tapa Chilla (13 Soap plant )///Monte Albán ///Chii ne chonna Piya (5 jaguar)///Monte Albán ///Gaayu’ Beedxe (13 earthquake)///Monte Albán ///Chii ne chonna Guela Fonts: http://www.famsi.org/zapotecwriting/zapotec_figures.pdf *There are a few more names, I will consult my pdfs and leave this post. *The translations for Zapoteco are mine, from online content, I believe the numbers are very "up to date" if someone has more contact with the language even more with Proto-Zapoteco would be of great help.

A meter in the game is not the same as a real meter proportionately. A game meter is probably half the size.

And thanks a lot to ValihrAnt for making his awesome videos!

About the visibility problem: @Langbartcreated this mod:

This is a more accurate model of the Tessarakonteres: The current one we are using for it is actually the Leotophoros

Hero selection for Sparta. Need techs for Lysander and Cleomenes.