Leaderboard

aI made a mod that implements my proposals on formations. I think the improvement is stark, here's a preview: Some detail: Assignment of units to formation places This is already very similar to the current algorithm, the only difference is point 3.2. I tried hard to introduce it, but, for simple that it sounds, I can't seem to make it work. Sorting the array doesn't seem to have any effect, I noticed it's always the same units that take the farther positions, those left out by the others. I'm attaching the js file with attemted edits. Also point 2 has seen an improvememt, similar to the one dealt in the next section. Rotation movement This had the greatest impact, in particular the second point. Makes formations a lot more usable I think. First point is dealt as in my last post of June 30. Column formation This was easiest. Not much to add about it. Further considerations and questions - I did quite some code refactoring, as much as I thought it would be acceptable. External use of some function may break, although it seems unlikely to me. - I'm not sure I respected coding conventions either. - Formations now don't get formed anymore in the mean direction of their members. - Browsing Formation.js history, I was startled noticing that actually my proposals are nothing new and already where in the engine some time ago (rP14292, rP14300). I'm not sure what to do with this information. - How is LoadFormation supposed to be used? - The only way to make formation turns more natural than this, is to change how entities turn around obstacles, so that they do not do it on position, but rather sliding around the corner as they turn. The improvement would be evident for formations, but would also be noticeable for rams and cavalry. I'm not sure where's the code for that. - I can keep making improvements if you like, my goal is to make formations good looking, and also reasonable even for competitive games, and I'd like my edits to go in the main game. (edit/clarification/license: I renounce to all rights on my work on the mod and agree to the legal disclaimer) Formation formation-mod-proposal.pyromod

What do you want to replace and why? Anyway, all I needed was to mogrify some assets and run fontbuilder using always colour in render options and have now a working replacement for nvtt, so no longer restricted to releases respectively already packed mods. Also created some tickets with compressonator to see if what we lack we can get in a future release. I used a somewhat brute method to get compressonator support, I'm sure @vladislavbelov had something more complete in mind For instance I don't offer modders dozen of options on how to treat their textures. For my layman eye they look better on average anyway. I'm not even sure what all those available tuning parameters are about, so everything default. So now I can build 0ad for windows from ground up using mingw, the only things missing are wseh and stackwalking for dumping crashes. Other than that it's fully functional as far as I can tell. If there are bugs they need first be found.

@maroderlol, you're right. I was looking at the structure tree, didn't realize where that graphic was supposed to go.

By that you probably mean the greyed out part and the tooltips? I can just say that from my point of view this is not ordered nor separated: And even worse when you select buildings and units:

Reading through the posts in this thread, it seems to be turning into a situation where people are asking for 0 A.D. to copy some things from AoE 4. The FSF recommends that free software projects avoid competing directly with proprietary software, because that would be playing to the strength of the proprietary software companies (money). Instead, compete in ways that FLOSS software is strong, such as the license privileges that users and volunteer developers have, the modability, the community and the long-term continuation of the project (in contrast to Microsoft's "end of life" policy that discontinues support for old software). Also, something that AoE 4 lacks, I would encourage meaningful improvements to realism and military simulation. This would include things like the following. Walls block arrows and javelins (except, of course, when fired through firing ports) Soldiers garrisoned on top of open stone walls with battlements have better protection from attacks Realistic castle defensive weapons are simulated like boiliing oil and fire pots for fire arrows fired by defenders. Concealment and camouflage are simulated so that ambushes and guerrilla warfare are possible. Okay, AoE 4 does provide this feature, based on gameplay preview videos. Battering rams aren't autonomous. They require drivers, who are vulnerable to boiling oil, fire, spears, etc.) Realism elements from the ancient history of warfare and castle fortifications, defenses and siege weaponry are added to the game. Dakara's suggestion is on the right track here with "more interaction with the ground (trap, bridge, fire at tree, stone wall and roman wood wall...)" A line of melee troops can block enemies from moving through them. Currently an enemy can walk right through a line of spearmen and enter a structure in order to garrison it. This is not realistic. In my opinion, anything that is disrupting the application of real ancient warfare tactics and strategy should be considered for improvements to the game. That way 0 A.D. would end up with even more of a learning benefit for players, as well as become useful as a wargaming experimentation platform. And it would advance the art of war gaming instead of regressing into direct competition with Microsoft. In a way, 0 A.D. will be competing with AoE 4 for players, but what we need to emphasize is that it is not an apples-to-apples comparison. The more knoledgeable that a gamer is about software freedom, the more that the gamer will see that 0 A.D. is an orange instead of an apple.

I can see that point. On the other hand, this is in a world where an entire giant empire is created and established in less than an hour: Smaller trees regrowing in half an hour doesn't seem that unrealistic when you think about that

Why ? What is there to say: I like to look at something different once in a while. Installation note: No guarantee that it will be compatible to any other mod, but if you want to try it, it's probably best to enable this one last (after) everything else. Current version: 0.27.3 (testing/ A27 / SVN) | 0.26.3 (A26) Where to find it: For A27/ SVN: newest testing version https://api.mod.io/v1/games/5/mods/1965214/files/3658747/download (needs manual installation) For A26: It is available through the in-game mod downloader or manually from: https://mod.io/g/0ad/m/shiny Some features: In case you don't like the new backgrounds: There is now the option to enable or disable it and switch between the new and the old backgrounds. Just go to the options and click on "Disable new background" _________________________________________________________ Credits to: @Langbart who gave me the idea and with whom I discussed much about the initial design/ who generally helped, @wowgetoffyourcellphone @Stan` @Radiotraining for tips on the design and a general thanks to everybody who gave their opinions and suggestions in this thread.

From a quick test: I like the movement. A bit less "shifty" than before

alright, that explains it

Neither you can do it all by editing the xml file you already found. I guess: search your favorite tooltip in game and look how it is done there (hint: the mod up and mod down buttons on the right hand side of the modselection panel seem like a good candidate)

@Ceres To be honest, I'm somewhat skeptical about your approach. You didn't answer my question from my previous post: The reason I asked is that I don't think we see the problem the same way; specifically I'm not sure if putting the [II] thingy on seven of the twelve icons will make it easier for players to understand the requirements for phasing up. In the discussion for the ticket you linked you wrote which is somewhat different to how I see it. You can put a [II] on the barracks, but one doesn't need barracks to phase up! Regarding marder's proposal: I think the phases and the buildings available are already clearly shown and separated. I'm not sure what it would improve if they were shown in columns instead; and in my opinion the phases would definitely have to be indicated. The core of the problem, as I see it, is that the classes of the buildings are not obvious. My suggestions: 1. include the 'Classes' line in the tooltips for the buildings 2. explain the requirements for phasing up in the info (as in my previous post)

To give you some starting information: The tooltips are defined in public/gui/common/setup.xml and you can use them in the xml files, which define the layout of the mod page like this (i.e. tooltip_style): <object type="button" style="MenuButton" tooltip_style="AwesomeToolTip"/>

See proposal for a26 there.

You'll just have to wait untill the reviewer has the time to commit your work (or asks another team member to do it on their behalf).

Regarding the need for placing additional information about enabled mods, I decided to create a new thread for it, as it is not related to this "shiny - an alternative main menu UI" mod by @maroder For interested people, please look there. Now BTT, and please accept my apologies for my OT stuff here.

You got a point, too.

That is largely true. That is not entirely the truth. The pope bestowed the title of Roman emperor on Charlemagne because he wanted to see a powerful state in the west that could harbor Christianity. Charlemagnes empire broke into pieces and later Otto 1 ruled over both Germany and Italy and received the title of Roman emperor. During history, Italy was sometimes part of this empire and sometimes it broke off. However tradition prescribed that the emperor had to be crowned by the roman pope. Also the empire was German and if it is the same as in the Dutch language, being called Roman does (always) not link to being associated with the city of Rome, but can also refer being associated with the Roman (Catholic) faith. I can't really speak for German (which has words ), but I know that in Dutch there are two words, rooms and Romeins (Note that the latter is always written with a capital, it's not an error ;P), and the first refers to being from the roman faith and the latter refers to the city. In Dutch we describe the holy Roman empire as rooms and I think this is a suggestion to think as Roman referring to the Roman faith. I did some internet search and German uses the word römisch and also romanisch (which seems to has fallen somewhat out of use) and I can not say if they have similar views.

I honestly don't think so considering that 0AD has not really brought much groundbreaking innovation into the RTS genre. Aside from citizen soldiers there is a parallel to be found in prior RTS games for almost everything. Also, Holy Roman Empire has nothing to do with Romans. They just called themselves that to sound cool.

OOS fixed. It was on my end, and not related to the mod. I was using data for the a25 public mod from... elsewhere. I'm not sure where yet. but when I ran `pyrogenesis -writableRoot`, the OOS went away. Good enough for now. I'll narrow things down tomorrow probably.

It is, though it is using outdated info. It could be nice though to have something on the web that just pulls the info from the latest release and can be used as a reference for discussion without having to launch the game.

I feel like the way particles work right now is good for most effects, especially things like fire, cloud or smokey effects, sparkles, and bolts of lightning. The only particle that I've not been able to recreate well in 0AD is a solid beam like some kind of laser. There are always gaps in the laser beam even when I set the particle spawn rate to an absurdly high number.

You could try to diff both your oos logs, see if something shows up

That file is used in the replaymenu in the public mod. It is loaded via Engine.GetReplayMetadata called from replay_menu.js

linothorax makes sense for elite citizen soldiers, same as other factions.

The textures are very beautiful, I imagine the work it took to make them. If you allow me, a few remarks.... regarding the tunics: Textura fase 2 infantería ligera; (túnica lusitana escaramuzador, espadachín, hondero, lancero, y de la caballería a distancia como caballería cuerpo a cuerpo). The skirts (or kilt), based on the statues called "Lusitanian warrior", are in checkerboard (or tartan) which was derived from looms, common to almost all peoples of Indo-European origin. I think it would also be important to consider Estrabon's express description of the Lusitanian people's way of dressing, he says: About it, also Diodorus Sciculus: I believe that linothorax is missing, such as the lorica saquamata, among the armor of the Lusitanians. As well as, I think that the coloring of the clothes as of the covers, in the textures, should be predominantly black. I also consider that leggings, leather or fur, should figure in the texture. I would also suggest putting the Torc on the neck, as virias (bracelets) in the textures, represented in the statues of the Lusitanian warriors: A good reference of a Lusitanian warrior wearing linothorax is the archaeological find in the Municipality of Bande, of what would be a chess piece, in it besides the linothorax, the Lusitanian warrior wears a montfortino helmet, and fur gaiters, and cape. Also interesting to note the traditional side braids of hair and mustache: Other good image references are those of the Galician archaeologist and historian André Pena Graña:

I think the mace houses look sad: While the barracks look like one amazed dude and a stoned one.

That appears to be identical to the in game structure overview from the learn to play button yeah?

I updated the mod to 1.6.3 (6/Sep/21) and changed the default hotkey to "Alt+Shift+F", but you should still be able to change the hotkey via the "Hotkey" option. (Also reduced the "ginormous garrison flag" by 25%, still well visible and the size is not too intrusive anymore.) Thanks for the feedback. The game details are left to game list, because I often moved my eyes from the top left of the game list to the bottom right of the screen in the original layout, just to see who is in that game, that's the reason. I won't change it back. But I added some new buttons with 1.6.3 (6/Sep/21), for example a "Replay" and "LastSummary" button, @nani helped with the code. I adjusted the blue color a little bit, can you check it again now with the new version.

CONTINUING HERE https://historum.com/threads/stabilizing-the-western-desolation-65292-translated.134151/page-2

SOURCES https://historum.com/threads/comic-of-general-ban-chao-by-hotoon.176163/ https://m.weibo.cn/u/2365723822?uid=2365723822

You need to actually create differential.

Hello. Oh sure. Write a faction and a building with false data and I recheck the auras that affect it