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The current loading screen tips are outdated, both the information, as well as with the visuals.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

The Spartans Above: King Leonidas and his "Battle Frenzy" upgrade Above: General Brasidas (left), Admiral Lysander (right) Above: Unused hero Agis III (left), Cleomenes III (right) Note: I might add Agesilaus as a 5th selectable hero and use the left-hand portrait Above: Queen Gorgo (left), Spartan Female Citizen (right) Above: Priest-Healer (left), Helots/Slaves (right)

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

I think a great way to nerf siege towers would be to make their arrow output equal to a fully garrisoned tower. Unless I am forgetting, siege towers have 10 arrows when fully garrisoned. 6 arrows instead of 10 would be nice. Also, improved pathfinding may make it easier for melee units to properly damage the siege towers as they retreat, which, in a24 is usually when melee units get stuck around each other w/rotation.

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.

With this feature soldiers move much more smootly, meaning that in those situations where you would use formations in a24 to smooth out your men, you don't need anymore. On the other hand, formations still move in a clumsy and rigid way that loses a lot of time, and brings no advantage anymore.

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?

I mean, it wouldn't be a huge deal to just remove 3 ai names per civ. They have plenty others.

That leads to a bigger question by and large since a number of heroes are represented in AI names already (See Persians). I personally don't have a problem with that.

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?

Right, depicting all 3 structures. D3994 is already accepted should be in for A25. Yes, one generic tip for formations, biomes and heros instead of individual tips. The patch D1730 (4/Jan/19 - Scroll through loading screen tips) is old but still works.

Yes that is exactly what I was thinking! I almost named the unit 'D'derridex' Romulans are my favourite civ

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>

I think we can implement these dudes into Empires Ascendant as well.

I suggested Yinyang because of the rebalance focus. Anyway the alpha names don't respect the old etymologies of the words (I pointed it out before, page 2). Furthermore, the whole idea of using letters like W, Y or Z is a problem in regard to ancient names and alphabetical order. At the end, instead of a cool idea it becomes pedantry.

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

https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4097

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.

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

I think metal is generally a problem in a24, no?

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

What do you think about this loading screen? I can delete the pink stuff if you want but what do you think about just the more plain background and the less scratched parchment?

I miss paired techs...

A version for a25 is now available for download on 0ad.mod.io (v0.0.25) Thanks for your work on that, @Jammyjamjamman!

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

@Ceres this patch: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4075 @Stan` @maroder please approve!

We can leave it at the letter Y, because it is such a good source of memes an puns. Why? Y. (the sound of it) Other considerations: Y-axis (since there are so many mathematicians and scientists playing this game), Y-chromosomes etc decent names starting with Y: Yurya, Yelizaveta Or I wouldn't mind if you just use my name.

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

I prefer "Tessarakonteres" to be a special tech for Ptolemies (Heavy Warship +25% health, +2 projectiles; or something).