Leaderboard

9) perma ban reza-lag

Well I'm working on the final RC, so... :p

I'm trying to make researched techs to change the look of affected entities. For example, Greave technology that allows all soldiers to have greaves on their legs. For this, I made custom actor based on basic infantry spearman, but the greave prop is separated into its own variant (similar to flag prop in garrison holder) named greave0 (without greave) and greave1 (with greave). To trigger the actor update, I made a new component, named VisibleTechnology. It will check if the player has researched the tech, and then set the actor variant based on the tech. The problem is that it seems that the TechnologyManager component cannot be called. I tried to call it in UpdateActor() function during Init() and OnResearchFinished(). The call is like this: let cmpTechnologyManager = Engine.QueryInterface(this.entity, IID_TechnologyManager); if (!cmpTechnologyManager) return; During Init(), it's always Null, and on OnResearchFinished(), the UpdateActor() isn't even called. I'm not sure what I did wrong here. Any help is truly appreciated. NB: I replaced the Athenian CC to train this infantry spearman with researchable graves. I also put Greaves as tech in Athenian Forge. Easiest way to test this is by loading Sandbox Athenians and training infantry spearman from CC and then research the Greave tech in Forge. The prototype is here: https://github.com/azayrahmad/visible-upgrade-A25 Thank you.

Hi guys. please read the post and give good feedback! I Hope devs will read your feedbacks and select the best choice. 1- add a active mod for lobby not a mod that only his account is present. 2- Add private message and ignore options for lobby. 3- Add email varification option for making account . Currently many players are spaming smurf accounts and its very annoying. Also with a email a player able to reset his password in case of forgetting it. 4- Make macdonates a better civ. Have you ask yourself why don’t people spam macs’ cav cham? And why they and the hero that give bonus to them are kindda useless? The answer is because jav cavs need metal! Its hard for players to spam jav cavs and cham cavs at same time then a player would never do such thing. If devs give normal jav cavs (100 food 50 wood )to macs then people can easily use mac cavs for fighting and use cav chams and their hero as well. 5- Any civ has fast antirams but macs. why swordmen of macs are chams? They should be merc. Then players can make fast antirams. 6- Mercs are very imbalanced. But why? Because they don’t need wood. In maps with low wood, civs that can spam mercs will rule! Fix this problem by decreasing metal and adding wood to them. 7- lets mercs work but with lower gathering rate (something like skiri). It lets peope spam mercs in phase two. 8- Do you know why people often hate playing noval maps? Because ships are annoying. People spam strong cheap ships and kill troops easily with strong arrows of ship. Especialy when you have to make eco near beach ships can be more annoying. I think ships should not able to attack people same as real life. Ships just atatck ships its all.

A very good idea indeed is to learn from lichess, they even have a very good FAQ, with a section explaining their rating system(Glicko-2, which I think is very good), how leader boards work, how they treat disconnections or leaving without resign, etc. All very pertinent to 0a.d. https://lichess.org/faq

Don't reinvent the square wheel ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinventing_the_wheel#Related_phrases ) Just learn from the rating system of Lichess.org, a free chess website

A very strange behaviour of the petra bot: it sends women to chop wood at my base after a rush. I don't think this is a strategic masterpiece...

- don't decrease rating, because playing no rated games doesnt mean that the skill decreases - if a player doesnt play rated, increase the uncertainty of his rating - if the uncertainty is too high, mark the player rating with a question mark and remove him from the leaderbord

My observations so far Better looking graphics, especially many of the new tree models are really nice, also i like the 3-d grass a lot. I think though, that metal/stone is harder to distinguish with updated textures. Melee units (inf and cav) seem very strong, especially pikeman, skiritai and sowrd cav, while archer units barely do any damage. Ofcourse archers needed to be nerfed compared to last Alpha, but they got nerfed a bit too much. Updated pathfinder improves gameplay a lot. Also big armys with siege manage to navigate relatively smoothly through narrow passages between houses The gameplay is more fast overall, encouraging agressive play, early fights, which is making the game more intense, that is a good thing in my opinion Champions seem to be viable option to go for, especially in 1v1 or 2v2 games ( also in a24 possible), but i cant find p2 champs ( which i liked in previous versions)

I agree with your fith point but your forth leaves much to be desired, if they give mac citizen jav cav then the mercs will be forever ignored,they could make cav easier to use but nah, that will just lead to endless balance tweaks and discussions.( and devs hate spear cav ehehe) ps: your sixth and seventh points are bonkers mate.

that reconstruction of quinquiremes is discredited. they had five lines of rowers but multiple rowers handled the same oar, so that in fact there were 2-3 lines of oars and no more.

Nah they look good just didn't have much time lately

It's fixed for now

Thanks so much @Stan`, @seeh! I'll try Stan's approach this evening!

yes good always. learn from the very active and up to date lichess. but of course there is no teamRating. i think this will nice feature. that don't mean that every of the team get the same teamrating plus if the team wins. of course not.

I've seen sth like that before; my ally's AI rushed (and I believe it captured a storehouse, which was very short lived) and then a woman would travel ~half the map to chop wood there. edit: she went forth and back several times; maybe she was finishing that one special tree... edit2: I looked if I could find a relevant save; and I did. When I load it and just let it run, I can see my ally commencing the attack and capture the storehouse; 2 mins later (10:10) I see the loaded woman walking by. HTH savegame-5349.0adsave

I will attach the replay files here: commands.txtmetadata.json

I thought that the leaderboard and the "current rank" are there for gratification. I don't like it neither, but I think it helps making people be more active. IMO, there is no need for a leaderboard then, and the simplest solution to make it better would be to get rid of it.

Hello, how about a second monthly elo list. 0ad is not like professional sports where enough people are constantly competing. I play for fun and have no interest in being rated/observed by others. (Therefore I refuse an elo decay, which would be a forced participation in the elo observation system). I need the elo value as a certificate to not be constantly asked about my ability (which is used very differently depending on the game). To balance games I rely on my experience with the players. The all-time elo value is more a rough statement about the minimum skill (an average with large standard deviation) of the players for me. Those who want to have their skills recorded in a list can hold their monthly list / monthly tournaments.

The rating is needed for balancing and for gratification. For balancing, IMHO, the best is to keep the rating of inactive players unchanged. If a player rated ≈1700 comes after six months of inactivity, he is likely to have more or less the same rating as before, and for sure he will be much stronger than a noob. Resetting the ranking would just frustrate the noobs. For gratification, the best would be to exclude inactive players from the leaderboard and from the ranking. A good compromise would be to split player into "active" and "inactive" players. Then it would be possible to delete players who switch to inactive (>6mo with no unranked games?) from the leaderboard and from the “current rank” in the box in the lower left, but to show the rating of players that are present in the lobby, so that balancing is kept and the leaderboard gratifies the active players more than inactive players. In “current rank” there could be written something like “Not Active”. The rating could have some graphical feature so that is clear a player is inactive (some symbol or a different color).

I don't think using the summary can possibly be fair.

Honestly if someone can make a simple animation of the bridge, that would be neat. Just make the ship lowers the bridge as attack_capture animation, and put it up again otherwise. But I don't understand anything about 3D animation :(. Meanwhile I could make it capture, perhaps on the weekend.

Yes, it's based on ELO with some modifications. The current logic can be found here: https://github.com/0ad/lobby-bots/blob/master/xpartamupp/elo.py

You're right, thanks for pointing that out, @Stan`. Here it is: <prop actor="props/structures/romans/rome_bridge_base.xml" attachpoint="bridge"/>

Might be a prop of the ships already. Using A23 ships would mean using lower quality models.

I made a new texture. These are a champion unit for the Imperial Romans.

Hello, I think reset the elo it useless because we don't have a really a competive system but we can make something for stimulate people to play more game 1 vs 1 rated. All know ranking system entice people play more often. Clean the ladder all alpha can be good. About 50% of people are inactive for the moment, It is not a question of punishing them, to identify their level on their return it could be good to enter on their profile their old rating, as a achievement. 2 ideas : Soft reset. All player > 1600 reset to 1600 (About 200 players ? ) Inactive leader will be at 1600 so the 100 best active player will be take their place and inactive good people will be 1600 so it ok. All player > 1400 reset to 1400 All player > 1201 reset to 1201 All player <1200 or unrank to unrank Why not in the profil pin up the elo before the reset (just for know approximative level and if this people are old or new player) Reduce the gain of point againt < 1200 or beginner (how do it??). With 3 wins we can rush 1400 rating. New system Add to ranking system, a grade system with a limited number people by grade. This will create competition for a better rank. All season all reset to 1200 rating. With a new profil system we can identity good player even with reset rating. Just for example, just random idea of name. Emperor : 1 spot King : 5 spot Lord : 15 spot TTTTT : 50 spot XXXXX :125 spot YYYYY :200 spot IIIIIIIIII : 500 spot Soldat : 800 spot All ending alpha, we pip up in profil the rank : A26 : Lord A27: King A28 : Lord In the future we could imagine a logo accompanying the rank in current alpha. A soft reset Pourquoi carrement pas supprimer ce système de cote en le remplaca

As shown in the attached picture, the Information box says Iberian fire ships can only attack other ships, which is not true at all. After my last night game I can confirm these ships can attack walls, docks, soldiers and even siege weapons. A group of 4 fire ships was able to destroy my partner's entire army and two of my rams on the beach in 1 sec. When we watched the replay, we realized that this happened several times troughout the game without us noticing. We never took any action to protect ground units or buildings until it was too late because we trusted that these ships, as stated in the information box, could only attack other ships.

No point of resetting ratings for each alpha. The alphas are similar after all.

I don't think it happens naturally, as the only player in the top 20 gaining points is Dakeyras and that is because I lost 3 matches against him. Also I agree with Gurken Khan and have little to add to his explaination. Imagine that with a new alpha all ratings reset. Then all players above 1600 will be 1200 and it would take several weeks before their ratings become faithful again. I think the idea should be to make the ratings faithful.

Exactly what I thought when making this. Xiphos tech with actual xiphos added and linothorax with actual units get their tunic/bronze armor changed into linothorax would be really awesome, but yes each actor must be changed, which would take a long time. I deliberately make it a new component so it should be possible to make it gradual i.e. even if the tech is affecting multiple unit types, you can apply visible tech to one unit type and it would be okay. I'm really looking forward to DE pushing the creativity of this component.

Thank you very much @hopeless-ponderer! Now the visible technology is working as intended. GitHub prototype has been updated. I will update the Readme for instructions. Meanwhile, for your Corvus tech, what power do you want to give the ships? I can make the tech and actor variant.

With all due respect, that reasoning doesn't sound coherent and even contradictory to me. Sure, people who quit don't need to be kept around; but there can be a lot of reasons why people are temporarily inactive. But if one understands how to boom, has a solid understanding of strategies and tactics and can do ~100 clicks/second, the rating one acquired with previous alphas will be a better indicator of how someone will do in the game than just giving them a noob rating just because the version number changed.

Resetting rating is definitely a good idea, as some players quit simply because they don't like the new Alpha. For these people no need to keep them at the top of the leaderboard. The main purpose of rating is for balancing. If your rating cannot reflect your theoretical performance in a game then it is quite pointless.

Or reset rating on each alpha

this comes up very often. Then people start to discuss how and when this rating adjustment should be done, and no agreement is reached. Still, most players agree some adjustment should be done. I suggest we collect a number of proposals and we make a poll.

I still see rockets! ...

A bug: Saying "Carth" -> get gauls saying "gaul" -> gets iber saying iber -> get carth

Cause most linux users run the game on out of age computers... @Freagarach had only one core until a few weeks ago, and @bb_ 's computer was like a proof of concept at events

-50 per inactive month should do it. It's simple, easy to understand, and incentivizes activity.

Since it seems to be a leaderboard issue: I don't think people who don't play (rated) anymore should stay at the top forever. I would handle it more like other world rankings (eg tennis), where if you don't earn points you move down. I think it's also justified by the change of versions, or people could become rusty (or deteriorate biologically/die). I would take a simple approach: at the end of each inactive calendrical month -50 pts. So a month of inactivity wouldn't be too bad, but a year of inactivity certainly would get you closer to the bottom. Since I only do SP I'm totally impartial.

Another idea: we can set up a council of ratings judge on the forum. Players who are unhappy with their rating can submit their replays and let the judges decide their skill level. Players who think others are smurfing can also submit such evidences and the Smurf's rating would be adjusted accordingly.

Maybe I am going of point, but I had a different idea for ratings for players on the other side of the spectrum. My suggestion: If a player under 1250 completes a game, his rating gets increased by 1 point regardless of whether it was a rated game. I think it would not hurt too much as people will probably learn from each game and after 50 games you are probably better than before. This would solve the issue with all the 1200 rated players and new players can easier distinguish between real noobs and those who did not play rated games.