Leaderboard

A25 look fine no? For me except the pathfinding is good ( too many unit in same spot) All civ is playable and have a little difference

I can only agree with it: for a casual players, tech differences aren't really relevant, unique buildings, items, units, building improvments, etc. things which are really visible are.

I agree very much with the type of civ uniques @chrstgtr is proposing. Unique techs are fine, but from a non competitive player perspective they don't make much difference for the unique felling of a civ. It is way better to have something unique that you can easily see and experience. I.e. some phase two champ, the war dogs, the workers ele or as an extreme example the Scythians from DE who have a completely different gameplay. @ValihrAnt for that reason I also agree that D4280 is superior to the alternative D4233

@user1 My username: gandolf_deluxecommands.txtmetadata.json Offending username: nobeuno Player nobeuno disconnected from two rated games and then refused to resign to make up the points. Attaching the files for our first game here.

hola soy un apacionnado de .0AD. y estoy buscando la manera de amejoral Las texturas de terreno ley el manuel me no lo consigo porfabor si me pueden alludar gracias

I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume it was a connectivity problem. However rating disputes will be needed to be judged by somebody else.

I saw Gutterer as Observer vs WavaABook. Book hast much more then the double pop. Gutterer always stopped game and resigned in again. bout 10 times or so. later he got problem with other players. AlocAcoc want report but did not. Maybe he will do later. I am not sure if i do correct. But i feel its correct to warn you from him. If you think its not my job to do this (i not played). delete my posting. no prob.

In my opinion Graphic Artists of 0AD have achieved a tremendus success in defining the modern graphic style for modern RTS games. All units, Biome and scaling is better than all other RTS game of this time. In case of music,sounds 0AD can also be regarded as a masterpiece. Gameplay has also improved significantly after the latest release. Although I would recommend beetter AI for FFA single player. Therefore I would deliberately recommend/suggest/support a massive marketing campaign for 0AD in this situation when people are eager to choose a new RTS leader for the upcoming time. Thanks All Artists, Musicians, Programmers for creating an awesome game like 0AD.

A very important aspect of multiplayer RTS gaming, is how quickly you can produce units. That is something you can practise on single player. So some general advices are: Keep the ammounts of resources in the bank low by spending them on useful things on the field. It is better to have 20 more infantry than having 1k wood and food in the bankt. Also keep your production buildings working as much as you can. Also learn some basic hotkeys/use of control groups. Specifically for 0AD, use batch training (when a building is selected, press shift on the keyboard) for batches of less than 10 units. If you have resources for larger batches, you should probably prioritize making more buildings. Also as sarcoma said, you can spectate games to see how other people develop their economy.

You can start right away but stick to noob games, won't be fun for anyone if you have to face experienced players. Even if you beat 2 very hard petras, MP is different. You won't learn much that way. Watch tutorial videos in yt: build orders, eco guides, etc. And join higher level games as spectator.

Side effect: Shooting a volley with 20*35 damage at a single woman.

Nice, worth looking what others think about it. Not sure if I explained well my intuition. My issue with ships is that the arrows are spread over all ships in range instead of having them used to kill one units after the other as it is the case for other units type. The first arrow goes to the first ships, the second arrow to another ships etc...( vs all arrows goes to one ship until it dies as it would be the case for another unit type). If I can put my 10 ships in the same spot, I can make sure the enemy ships will spread the arrows on the 10 of them and if I have more ships, I also have more units to split the arrows while I would at the same time fire more arrows on the enemy. When my ships do not overlap, ships in the back will usually be out of range. They will therefore not be targeted nor fire at the enemy ships. If I do a quick drawing of ships range with each color standing for a different player: - ship B only targets the enemy ship F; - ship C will spread one third of his arrows on each ship D, E and F; - ships D and E will fire only at ship C; - ship F will fire at ship C and ship B, both receiving half of the dps; If ships do not move, ships C will be the first one to die since it receive all arrows from D and E and half of the arrows from ship F. Ship F will be the second one to die since it receives all arrows from ship B and one third of the arrow from ship C. Both player loose one ship. With overlapping ships: - B and C send one third of their arrows on each enemy ship; - D, E and F send half of their arrows on each enemy ship; In this case, I would expect the blue player to loose 0 ship while the red player loose everything. Since repairing is free, the blue player may never loose a ship if he is active in repairing them and there is no possibility to ever come back. The initial number advantage can be cumulated over time.

Ah yeah, sorry, they released 11 some time ago. My bad. ^^'

Yes, in this idea, that's why I think that it is almost impossible to get a perfect balancing without playing too similar civilisations (one or two visible differences would not be enought), that's why it could be a good idea to create a kind of optionnal system as proposed by vv221 :

it appears to me online "competitive" players always jump on whatever bandwagon emerges from minuscule unbalanced advantages across versions (i.e. sling/ram in a23, archers in a24, what appears to be merc cav in a25), so maybe it's overstated how homogenous things need to be...there will always be some lever to manipulate, so to speak

(might be too obscure, or just particular to my ocd...)

A quick timeline for being aware... 1. Lusitanian War (155 BC and 146 BC) 2. Campaign of Decimus Iúnius Brutus against the Galaic (138-136 BC) 3. Sertorian War (80 BC 72 BC) 4. Second Civil War of the Republic of Rome, also known as: Civil War Caesarian (49 BC and 45 BC) 5. Cantabrian Wars (29 BC - 19 BC) Buccula and bipenne are registered in the Astur-Cantabrica war, which involved a broad alliance of tribes from the Minho, Portugal to Cantabria. As well as this period, the design of the caetras that was listed for being printed in the Lusitanian faction is from this period. In other words... a period on the threshold that the game is about. The use of flaming darts, which currently figure in the Iberian faction, are recorded in the course of the Cesarean Civil War that took place in Hispania, and whose protagonists, once again, are the Lusitanians. before the Cantabrian War. And the period of the War of Sertorius, prior to these retro-cited events, which was greater in magnitude than that of Viriato, and in which all military resources were fully developed, including naval battles... will it pass unnoticed? If with Viriato the infantry and heavy cavalry were few, still, surely there should be an amount to make its existence possible, with Sertorius it is widely employed.

O ARMAMENTO DOS LUSITANOS NAS CAMPANHAS DE VIRIATO - Miguel Sanches de Baêna Caderno 9 - Terras Quentes - Exército (doczz.com.br) pg. 44 - 109 of PDF. Write an article saying this to Blázquez... that he is mixing Iberians, Celtiberians and Lusitanians.....

I like this a lot, I could imagine it would help to do a building rush against another player.

Special things don't mean diverse game-play. Kushites had their pyramids for a while, but it did not affect their game style. So here comes the example of https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4280 which is something that affect the style of kushites. Not by adding something special, but by empowering what we all ready have. There are more examples like this: Naked fanatics: They are totally unique and you can produce them. There is no reason to produce them though. Gauls also get the trumpeter. Athenian Council chamber: You get an unique building to produce heros (I admit, somewhat similar to Gauls, Spartans, Persians and Mauryas). However you only touch the building to train the heroes and maybe you get a tech there. So it is a building with hardly any meaning in the game. Maybe allow it to train (some) champions would be nice or give it a territory root as the Persian and Mauryan palaces have. All helenistic factions get the Theatron: Not that anyone really would consider building them. I would suggest adding them to p1 with cheaper cost and lesser effect (10% territory boost). Once you get to p2, you would be able to do an upgrade to get the full territory boost. It might also open some possibilities for theatron related bonuses. Colonization: This is a unique tech, that you most often don't find any place for in your games. Reducing the price of this technologies to 15ow,150m might create a nice option. Pillars of Ashoka: This could help to diversify the Mauryas, but unfortunately there is currently no reason to build it. An idea would be that if would increase the speed of traders and grant experience to healers withing the range of the pillar. Mauryas: They get something unique of their champions and it deals a lot of crush damage. It is not the the elephant, but mace champion. It is unique, but nobody bothers making it. I think this is because human units have to much crush resistance (Reducing crush resistance might also mean that other units need to be rebalanced. Note: Kushite macemen also suffer somewhat from this problem). Temple of Vesta: When I play Romans, I tend to forget that it exists. If we made it more potent (larger aura range), it would be more of a defining feature Cavalry diversity of Persians: The persians have an amazing number of 6 different cavalry types in their stables. The fact that this diversity is not really used makes this a shame. So balancing all cavalry to give each of them an unique place could help. It would also help if Chariots and Cataphracts were unlocked with the same upgrade (also goes for Seleucids). Finally Kushite mercenary camps: If you want to double down on diversity, you might want to reduce to cost of these camps to 100w,50m to put an emphasis on their uniqueness. So there you find a way to diversify all factions but Britons and Iberians. For britons the was a woad technology proposed in A24. Certainly the Iberians are all ready diverse. I think we could do better in terms of diversity if we only used the thing that we all ready have. Also we could improve our heroes and I welcome any suggestions on

Hi all, after playing for a while, I finally have found some good friends in games. We had a couple of meetups and they were fun. I’m happy that I can find them here. Just wanna thank you and wish everyone a good day! :D

It is not I don't want to include it. It is simply a lack of evidences. I heard your opinion but I am not convinced. You claimed a lot of weird things: You claimed the Celts were commonly using scale armor but it is not the case. You claimed there was a Celtiberian ceramic proving it, you didn't provide the evidence when I asked for. You claimed there were accounts from classical authors suggesting its use, but you simply said something weird about Strabo mentioning heavy infantry (which doesn't mean lorica squamata). In the end there is only one plausible evidence in a strictly Iberian context, Llíria. But even a specialist like Quesada-Sanz (which is THE specialist concerning Iberian warfare and armament) is unconvinced about the possibility it represents a metallic armor. So if you want absolutely to depict a scale armor, it should at least be kept for the Iberians.

I guess they are culturally important and strengthen the gathering morale of unites who see them. Same as the Iberian monument.

Actually I uploaded it in that PPA as a temporary solution until the official PPA get properly fixed, but I can keeps updating it until needed and as soon as I still have time to do it.

I'm curious about the economic bonus applied to the pyramids. What's the historical justification here? Or even what's the non-historical justification?

It just seems similar to familiar techs (ie, champ research tech now and the old merc upgrade tech).

Aww, I thought being able to upgrade Barracks and Stables to Royal Barracks and Royal Stables was pretty unique.

Mace had a dmg bonus vs Athens/Spart and a dmg debonus vs Romans. This in effect made Macedonian silver shield bearers better than maxed-out spartan spear champion - effectively best spear champion IG. Romans had a defensive bonus - as long as they fought on their own territory units had extra armor (I believe). Mace/Rome got a kick in the gut going from a23 to a24, effectively. They were also unique in sense of multi-building siege capability as not other civ had that.

It looks fine. It's probably pretty good boost, but it doesn't look "special" in the same way that celts' building pop bonus was "special" or mace's siege workshop was "special" in a23. It's the totally unique civ aspects (like the celt house bonus) that I think are the most fun, but are also the most difficult to come up with (in fact, in a23 not all civs had something like this). I very quickly scanned your other civs and something like the helots for Sparta would be more in line with what I am thinking of. Or even Maurya getting 2 heros. One thing I think about that would fit this, would be a civ that is almost just a raiding/nomadic civ. But that becomes very difficult to articulate into a particular bonus.

Check out my "Every civ is my Favorite civ" thread for some Mace ideas. You like them?

Most competitive players are not playing the game often, so it's not being built for competitive players. The fact that we don't have such diverse civilizations is because there is no design plan and someone to command it. I've even started working on it, but it takes a lot of time, and unfortunately I don't have my free time to spend on it anymore, Besides that the part of 0.ad community is extremely ungrateful. You spend hundreds of hours working on various improvements, to find two or three problems/errors and post on the forum all the time when the new alpha is bad. I said several times that a24 was a work in progress and that a25 would be much better, but they continued to talk a lot of crap. Well the "end" result of the work is an alpha25 much better than alpha24 and 23 as I said. Lack of patience is a problem, especially for those who don't move a finger to help with anything. Basically the alpha 24 - 25 was mostly build by me and @Nescio (gameplay/balance), but we're not working on it concretely anymore, so if no one else is interested in this, players are destined to play with these civilizations / gameplay / balancing for many years, like that how was a23 sling + ram.

As long as @fabio keeps updating it you should be fine

Disappointingly, for most people it is reversed.

A good design choice in my view. I also like Dawn of War 2.

That’s right, and points out at the core issue: some players favour balance, other favour diversity. I for one would play much more often if there was more diversity between the civilizations, but I understand that other players want (almost) perfect balance. Since we can not have both at the same time, I think there is roughly three choices: (easy choice) Focus on balance, at the cost of diversity (easy choice) Focus on diversity, at the cost of balance (hard choice) Provide both experiences, and allow the player to chose one I am of course all in favour of the hard one, but if I were to chose between the easy ones I would without any hesitation advise cutting the balance in favour of fun original gameplay (I guess you would disagree on this one ). A perfectly balanced game means that I have very low incentive to try multiple civilizations, so it reduces a lot the time I’m willing to spend playing 0 A.D. before switching to something else.

I was thinking the same for a while ! The game seems to be more and more tailored only for hardcore competitors who expect perfect balancing between all civs : something which is impossible without making them completely similar. This withdraws most of the game diversity except graphically and, to some extent, the interest to play different civs to get a different playing experience. The game becomes quickly annoying for casual playsers and generally not hardcore competitors players. I believe the game is not played only by hardcore competitors. Maybe the generalizing civs movement was intentend to get a sens of balancing before re-adding diversity to the game to take it out of its competitor niche market ?

The age franchises has a habit of making it seem like things are good looking by making them super bright and cartoony. They did it with AoE3 and now with 4 as well. What I really want is for BHG to make a new version of RoN, but that's kinda hard when BHG hasn't existed for years and the IP is back in the hands of Microsoft. Then again, maybe don't touch it again and @#$% it up.

My take for now: Units overlapping is not a desired outcome of the pushing logic However, it is quite a bit harder to prevent it and actually make pushing work and/or pathfinding work. The pathfinding benefits of pushing outweigh the cons of units overlapping I don't know if I'll have time / how much time I'll have for A26. Possibly little. So I wouldn't expect this to get much worked on. It's possible that there could be tweaks to pathfinder.xml to improve things. Do you mean that e.g. A24 already had problems with this or are you talking about the A24-A25 SVN version?

Second video: Macedonian side is using spear cavalries to flank Mauryan archers. In vanilla, it's better not to do this flanking manoeuvre. 1200603073_RgDemo4-1.m4v

@user1 @Stan` 1v1 against "Msg" (1635). I was clearly winning when I "lost" connection. Rated game. From lobby I could see he had resigned after I went out, so I gained no points. Edit: obv my connection was absolutely stable (I tried to join other matches I could), but I could not rejoin the game until he resigned Jofursloft vs Msg.zip

I feel a bit sorry for this uneducated person:

Hello, I was playing 1v1 with Rev0 and as he was losing, he decided to just exit the game. That way the ratings didn't get adjusted and he basically sorta wasted my time. Thank you for your cooperation. metadata.json commands.txt

@user1 Another one disconnecting a rated game. my user: gandolf_deluxe cheater: aditya9812 commands.txt metadata.json

Yes in the future.

Its structures are well developed and designed, I'm tempted to try to see them on 0ad, the cool thing about making the files available and that we can always count on the help of someone in the community.

It would be cool if the Romans had Caesar, a bit late in the timeline but very revelant since he fought Cleopatra, Vercingetorix, and the Britons. Current faction is based on Polybian era tho, maybe for a possible triumvirate civ ?

Is having more than three heroes a Macedonian bonus; or do you plan to roll out that to other civs too ? Also the cuirass on Craterus looks great, very detailed texture.

Since he was Roman perhaps it might be better to use one of the Lusitanian chiefs who sided with Sertorius as hero; that is assuming any of their names have been recorded.