Leaderboard

I would like to congratulate you on the great work done with the graphics in this new alpha. I haven't had a chance to try the new game extensively but I really liked what I got from my first gameplay. The new environments are beautifully crafted. Lot of attention to details. This combined with the new pathfinding improvements is definitely a big step forward for the game.

Lol this is exactly what we've discussed before, every few years or so. My idea was that each CC has its own territory and you can build structures only in CC territories based on their settlement phase. New CCs would start at Village. Your initial CC would be the Capitol, but you'd have the option to designate any City phase CC as your capitol. CCs would also come with names ("Rome", "Capua", "Ostia" etc.).

The tuna doesn't jump.

All of these above options limit player option in some extent. What I would suggest, is that if a unit misses a certain amount of shots, it will switch to a different target. That new target should preferably be something that is easier to hit (close, big or stationary).

Birds are doable I'd like to have more anyway.

Caesar III used birds to highlight fish areas, which I think is a decent and semi-realistic option, if water cannot be made transparent / people don't want jumping fishes.

This is actually one of the reasons the "Resistance" component lives. We already keep a list of who attacks a target, so it will be quite easy to specify the max and check for that in UnitAI. But there is something else at play as well. The units will follow gladly anything whilst strolling past enemy lines. I've got a quick-and-dirty fix, which I should improve at some point (https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3853). This way the archers would be less distracted at the very least.

And I'm back for the obligatory 'lets play' variation of the show with the new Alpha, where I demonstrate just how awful I am at 0AD! Prem is tomorrow morning, but thought I'd post here in advance as I'll be at work.

I was thinking about that. When it comes to unlocked units / buildings / upgrades easiest way seems to leave those universal: If you have at least one civic center of a certain phase, you benefit from what it unlocks everywhere. One can make the claim that the technology is transferred between establishments, same way blacksmith upgrades apply to all troops anywhere on the map automatically. Wasn't sure about buildings; Technically we could have it so a phase reliant building can't be built in territory maintained by a civic center below that phase. But this might get too complicated and confusing, probably not worth it. So in the end unlocked buildings should be possible to place anywhere once they become available. Not sure if downgrading should be a possibility instead. So if you lose the last civic center of a given phase, you can no longer build / produce / research things from that phase until you upgrade a new civic center to reach it again. You don't lose existing stuff, just can't do new ones till you get back to that phase somewhere. This one seems more reasonable and I'd be in favor of it, what does everyone think?

boonGUI User interface mod for the RTS game 0 A.D. Everyone can follow the development, contribute to discussions, report bugs, suggest features or even make pull requests. Install Choose your preferred method GitHub git clone https://github.com/LangLangBart/boonGUI.git Linux: ~/.local/share/0ad/mods/ macOS: ~/Library/Application\Support/0ad/mods/ Windows: ~\Documents\My Games\0ad\mods\ Pyromod Drag and drop the file over the 0ad start icon or double click it. The mod will be unpacked and placed in your 0ad mods folder ZIP Unpack it it in your /0ad/mods/ folder Launch 0 A.D., click Settings and Mod Selection. Double-click boonGUI, click Save Configuration and Start Mods. Troubleshooting If you get errors/warnings after upgrading, delete the existing boonGUI folder and install the mod again. If that doesn't help, just post a message here or on GitHub.

J U D E A N S (Hasmonean Dynasty) Download Repository: https://github.com/0ADMods/judeans

Please introduce slaves in 0ad for the purpose of historical accuracy. 1/5 of the roman population were slaves.

I'm wondering what the remaining steps are before the game enters beta. I saw the Gameplay Feature Status wiki, but the last time that anything was updated on that was at least 4 years ago. Is that page still up to date? I'm also wondering what goals the programmers have? The artists? Map designers? What are your top priorities for the game? If there are any game developers that I missed, I'd be interested to know what your priorities are.

It's sensless to jutst spawn a slave. It would be better if there is option to enslave enemy units and use them as civilians (or keep them in prisons). Eventually they woulld have option to broke slavery and join back to their own faction (either with rebellion or release by their army).

IMHO, probably the map script using very small brush sizes for the terrain blending. Something we should improve in any case. The textures are now really nice, they can be painted in broad swathes instead of chopped up and sprinkled together.

Some small updates: I have a static pyrogenesis.exe. It runs till after reading configuration but then fails with a pagefault (outside legal mem range). Running gdb within wine seems tricky. By default the backtrace is only framepointers and if I try dwarf-2 symbols which is apparently supported winedbg crashes. So I put debugging it aside for now. I started cleaning up my patches, only over 60 left of more than 150. I also packaged premake-5.0.0_alpha16 and rdb's fcollada and use them as external tool respectively lib; they work both fine it seems Building nvtt on mingw-w64 is completely broken I found out.

Oh, thanks. At least it makes it valid json ...

The promotion system is part of the problem here. In the real world there is a lot more difference in the tactical capabilities between a raw conscript swordsman, a veteran swordsman, and a fully armored, professional swordsman, than there is between a swordsman, an axeman, and a maceman. Without embracing fantasy tropes, It is difficult to conceptualize an axeman type unit that would not just be a reskin of a swordsman.

שלום from Israel Tel Aviv.

This is quite smart actually, however, we would probably want to disable it for hunting for food. I would still like it if units did not have such a strong preference of what to attack in the first place, and at least have their next targets be close to their last target. Its one thing to be unable to kill the hero, but another to be unable to ignore the hero :I.

Hi, I also thought that range units should prioritize certain unit types. Then I thought that would take away some of the micro positioning.Then I thought what if enemy units closer than 25m/50m or 60% of range would be prioritized first (like in real life self protection comes first). And then a prioritization of unit types would take place. Likewise for a26 I would like to see more geographic bonuses / more weight of positioning like Cossacks. For dancing with heroes, a stun function could increase the risk. Something like when more than 40 range units attack a hero there is a 20% chance to get stunned (fall off horse 5sec / get overpowered 3sec) and take a lot of damage. I think units mico is a skill and should be able to give advantages, only heroes are overly resilient as tanks.

By "send" I meant a sim-command.

We could also make this a feature to gameplay, like upgrading buildings to better/stronger etc versions of themselves by the age. This could help 0ad be unique to all other games of the type, and also add new forms of tactics and gameplay. EX: You could choose between making multiple mud houses if you need more population but are having resource trouble, or if you are rich in resources and lacking for space, you could build a few stone houses which only cost a bit more and build time is slightly longer. Rushing/blobbing against building tall as such.

Setting a max number of attackers takes out a lot of strategy/micro in the game since it takes away a lot of the incentive to position your armies when attacking. An alternative solution that would have less unintended consequences would be to just make heros' turn rates even slower than they are now since dancing abuse tends to only really occur with heros. Also please note that heros' turn rates did not change from a24 to a25. Nonetheless, I have not seen this happen much, so I am inclined to just leave things as they are until it becomes a pervasive problem like it once was.

It could be done, just implement such function in the GUI and send it to Attack.js, there save it and use it to give a high preference to matching templates in "GetPreference".

As most of you know I am not aware of what things are challenging to make features and what things are not. I notice that when I tell 20 archers to attack a unit, they first kill that unit (with a lot of overkill), but then pass on to a unit of their choosing. It seems that ranged units have a strong preference for melee units when they are choosing what to attack (maybe its just choosing the closer units). I have tried a few times but it seems to be impossible to keep archers focused at shooting skirmishers behind a wall of pikes. If this is happening as I have observed, then it usually leads to skirmishers killing the enemy melee faster than archers can do the same, which makes them better units in many battles. What if there was a way to make units prioritize the type of unit they were originally ordered to kill?. I feel that this would not only help with hero micro/dancing and archer/slinger frustrations, but it would also add a large amount of controllability to the units that would raise the skill ceiling of fights and make them more fun. Perhaps it could be added as *hold hotkey*-> *right click*

I suggest having a <MaxAttackers> element in the <Health> component. That way if it's set to 20, only 20 of the enemy's archers will target him and the rest will target the next nearest unit. Could set buildings to something ridiculously high or turned off by default, while units would have a much lower number. (We could eyeball it by approximate unit size or health or both?)

I mean, the stone and metal icons are quite distinct.

(@hyperion if you did that, you would get the following: WARNING: specificName should be an object of civ->name mappings in budhist_evangelism.json) @PyrrhicVictoryGuy It should read something like: ... "specificName": { "bact": "Buddhist Evangelism" }, ...

Hi Bings thanks for the nice feedback. You can add gui.scale = 1.1 in your user.cfg

We're still trying to get it to build with some Ubuntu rules, so far with no success. Thank you!

The settler pikemen: The bactrian hillmen: # As they are meant to be the lowest of levies their equipment isn't standardized therefore the mix of weapons, only in their elite state do they get some measure of uniformity . The Parni Raider :

Helots in Sparta are different than Athenians slave, IIRC. They are state-owned and also join war as missile units, while Athenian slave were personal property and never enlisted as soldier. My idea is that slave should be limited to one per citizen

Yes, it is the most functional that has been achieved so far. Even better than the concept I had initially come up with. -The slave appears from the second phase. -That they must have the skill of "forced labor" and that it takes away his life, Especially in mining work. -and that they are worth less than the workers (cost).

I honestly like the Delenda Est mod approach with citizen units and slave units both with male and female variation. With slave units being better at hard work.

I'd guess the better supporting argument would be about Sparta, a society so paranoid about a slave uprising that was fully militarized. Slave population was overwhelmingly higher than citizens. It would make sense, if this were to be introduced, to start with sparta.