Leaderboard

I strongly agree with this: it's an interesting idea on paper, but quite impractical in the gameplay. I wouldn't rely on this mechanic for an important set of extra units, also because it doesn't happen easily to have the chance to conquer a barracks, rather than the CC and all the core buildings while in the enemy's territory. And in those cases, in a 1v1 setting, you would end the game before even having the chance to get new units. So I think there should be also a "regular" way to get them, by extra techs or buildings.

I think you full well know that the Soviet Union was not what Marx had in mind.

Political discussions alway tend to digress and turn into a fight but if this discussion continues to be insulting and demeaning I will close it.

While I could agree on the mentally handicapped part I don't know why you need to call Drumpf a girl. Donald Trump has described climate change as "a hoax," but petitioned to build a wall to protect one of "the greatest golf courses in the world" in Ireland from rising sea levels.

Getting rid of 1% of the pop could do a lot for the climate. https://gettotext.com/oxfam-study-claims-the-super-rich-are-the-ecological-vandals/

(That should be fixed in SVN.)

I mean, they don't help a lot during battles, but i find them pretty useful before one, to get my melee troops in the front and archers in the back before i attack-move. Otherwise my ranged troops tend to be in the front, since they are faster.

How about allowing Roman military camps to be built in allied territory and allowing them to recruit troops that your allies have? its a purely team based bonus, but maybe something unique to consider for team games. I like the idea of hastati having a pilum attack, but I think for the sake of simplicity it should simply be treated like how maiden guard can switch between sword or bow. I think again this was done in Delende Est. And I think it can also be justified historically because most combat in 0 AD is taking place in or around a supply base. So infinite pila is not unreasonable. I would take it one step further and maintain the original unit stats, so you have what is essentially a heavier skirmisher but it moves slower and can fight in melee if required. This is I think would be a good way to capture the essence of early Roman legionaries while keeping it nice and simple. And the code has already been done in Delende Est so its available for use in this regard, just needs tweaking

Buenos días /Buenas tardes; -(posibles)Textura escudos para "Auxiliares Vettones"; Unidades y referencias de unidades y escudos; Disculpen las molestias*

I was always puzzled what would determine which civ could build colonies; after all, most of our civs spread over at least one (sub-)continent or more? I just learned the other day (from a youtube vid) that Nuba Villages can be build in neutral terrain; but they have territorial decay. Maybe we could expand on that idea and give all civs some kind of special colony? (I sometimes mainly build a colony just to get access to certain mercs.)

I don't entirely disagree. But functionally this would mean those units never get use. You used to be able to do this (e.g., Maurya could get rams in a23 if they captured a fort and Mace could get champ skirms and swords if they captured the right buildings), but because of balancing issues these functions were all but never used. ETA All this is to say we are a long way away from such a feature *actually* being a feature and not a trivial footnote

Separately, I would also like propose offensive priests that convert enemy units. Not sure what civ this would fit best with (Rome would've been nice in the Constantine era, but that is after the 0ad timeframe)

0ad isn't balanced well enough to allow this. If you are capturing a bunch of enemy buildings then you have already won. (It would also create snowballing issues, otherwise)

If that is true then maybe make it something like dogs but with weaker units that can level up into CS and then those leveled up units don't counter against your pop count?

The earlier example with the Han Barracks would be such a case. In theory, I haven't tested, the only other civ with access to crossbow is Macedonians who could build crossbowmen. The Ji/Halberd is unique to Han only. So capturing a Han barracks would give access to 2 unique units no other faction has. Acquiring tech by capturing enemy building has been a standard feature in Warcraft and Starcraft. Can make interesting games with surprises, granted the factions are unique. I like the idea to have that in 0AD.

The Roman republic had more citizens than most other states, simply because they granted loyal allies citizenship. I think the way Auxiliary troops worked was that they were recruited from non-latin citizens or other (non-citizen) allies. If you served for several years in the army, you recieved citizenship. So it seems more fitting to make them citizen soldiers. When I think of very limited and boring, Sparta comes to mind. Romans do have their military camps.

Still. I mean different in function. So not just a different name/units. What LetsWaveABook suggested was totally unique. Changing name and unit type would not be. Edit: I don't have a good suggestion myself--making totally unique features is hard.

I mean something that is more than just a name change too...

I hadn't considered 'Seasons' - I actually really like the sound of that.

First little test game with proof of concept of the princess mechanics. Princess moves in roman enemy territory and establishes her camp, a young roman nobleman is in love with her already, baby on the way, they build a big house.

Because it is hard to be firing a bow at someone when they poke you with a sword? And that means you don't have to give cavalry some pierce resistance just becasue they "need" to counter archers.

why would a unit have its attack lowered when in a close fight? right now skirmishers deal a higher damage than spearmen.

Essentially, yeah. I just got into the weeds talking about armor values. You summed it up nicely.

IMHO It could be like this: Cavalry: Glass cannons Low armour meaning they should be used wisely But high speed meaning they can pick their fights. Decent attack values lets them easily kill off stragglers. Allows them to quickly reach ranged infantry to make short work of them. Ranged infantry: Low armour, vulnerable against any unit when in range. When the enemy is too close, they switch to their melee weapon, which is merely a dagger, so they'll be massacred by (almost) anything. Melee infantry: Good armour, depending on the exact unit type, meaning they can hold their ground against cavalry. Spearmen have their "range" advantage so multiple men can attack one target more easily. Their lack of speed make them sustain casualties against ranged infantry, but when up close they hack them away.

Are you serious? even if they buy saudi oil, burning it still releases emissions in the usa. This notably does not increase emissions in saudi arabia. Either way, this does not reduce USA's carbon footprint. A better example of exporting emissions is buying beef from brazil, where the emissions happen in the country the product is bought from.

I mean, the game's meta already changes every Alpha. Might as well make it a feature instead of a bug.

To be honest, the overemphasis on individual actions, such as people having fewer children or the president being less ostentatious is crazy. Oil producers in the us even support reducing carbon footprint, because they know it can improve their image and it won't lead to any decrease in sales. People can not change their carbon footprint very easily while the systems they live in are not designed to reduce it. With all this talk about individual responsibility, people forget the amount of power that governments/corporations have over our behavior as well as the changes that could be made to decrease waste and emissions. For example, there is the good idea to make companies responsible for the packaging that they sell with their product. At least in the USA, packaging is not made to be easily dismantled. If it were, it would be easy to sort one's recycling and improve efficiency there. I feel this should be a no-brainer and all it requires are some new, clever designs for packaging. Another idea would be to sponsor car trade ins, exchanging super old gas guzzlers for newer electric cars or efficient hybrids. I can totally understand people being financially trapped into continuing to use an old car, because they have exceeded the economic service life and now need to repair/ refuel very frequently.

not in my country.

Yes, I do agree with this statement 100% - as I said, the existing player base who've been here a while know it, and it goes without saying that the volunteers contributing to the project know it. But for the sake of a moniker, potentially a lot of new players, influencers and maybe even future prospective future volunteers might not understand it due to preconceived notions of what a project in an 'alpha' might be. I'm slightly wary of the alpha and even the beta tags, both suggest a state of pre-completion that apply much more to commercial projects. The impression I get is that alpha means early, unfinished, not fully functional to a lot of people. Beta suggests almost finished, perhaps not quite fully featured yet, but may be soon. Neither of the above truly apply in the case of 0AD. It certainly won't be 'finished' soon, if ever (as you rightly suggested.) And while there are longstanding things involving ongoing work to improve, it's also a competitively played game with a fully functional and growing feature set. It can be played and enjoyed in a state of completeness with very professional presentation. It is what it is now, and it will be what it evolves into in the future. I don't think a changing of the versioning name would change the perception of 0AD overnight, but possibly it might subtly improve certain first impressions, maybe cause people to take a deeper look at the project rather than dismiss it through misguided preconception. Maybe?

I'm strongly in favor of calling the release after a26 beta... I guess the devs don't see it as a polished game yet, and a lot can be done, of course. But seeing that corporations publish unfinished - or even unplayable - versions, I don't think we have to be overly modest. Just call it beta, still leaves all freedom and yet signifies progress.

It is what people form in their heads, they think that a great change will occur when they stop having that title. A lot of people stuck with that A23 concept. That cycle did us a lot of damage, but we are getting back on track. You have to take the 0 A.D project as a project that will always be ongoing thanks to the fans.

D4338 - Fix passibilty overlay in atlas Created a patch to fix the problem. Unfortunately, the only way to fix on your computer is build the game from the source code and apply a patch.

Right now, all spear units have a mix of attack values, with both pierce and hack damage. If you just give them hack damage and remove the pierce damage they give, then re-adjust the armor values of cavalry, you can make spear units better against cavalry by default. It should be thus: Cavalry Low hack armor (vulnerable against melee units) Spear cav are the anti-cav cavalry, bonus attack vs. cavalry (in DE this is reversed, but let's not argue anymore about this, I'm just going with EA's counter scheme) Since spear infantry have their piece attack given back to hack attack, spear infantry are now a natural counter to cavalry High pierce armor (strong against ranged units) Combined with fast speed, should make short work of ranged infantry High crush armor Ranged Infantry Low hack armor (vulnerable against fast melee units, such as melee cav) They should melt away against any melee unit that reaches them Their range and pierce attack should help keep melee infantry at bay, but melee cavalry close the gap too quickly and massacre them Medium pierce armor (good at dueling other ranged units, but not great) Low crush armor (vulnerable against splash damage from catapults, eh hem) Melee Infantry High hack armor (good at dueling other melee units; resistant against melee cav) Pierce armor Medium for spear Infantry Low for sword Infantry Sword infantry are the anti-infantry infantry, bonus attack vs. infantry Medium crush armor I mean, we can quibble with exact values, but something like that^

Yes, but for this ti implement, you'd have to be able to query or change diplomacy values via tech modifiers. Would also offer some interesting mechanics for the ministers to garrison in allied buildings for example. Or eg princess garrisons enemy building and sabotages eco or so, until she is uncovered and exposed.

Why do sword cavalry have such high health? Cavalry is all about mobility and a strong attack. Its weakness should be cost and low health - there are limits how much armour that you can put on a horse and it makes a big target.

Hi, some suggestion here: the "sign board" thing on the town center, barrack and other building can actually be removed as the “sign board" were started to be popular on Tang/Song dynasty. The word "大雄宝殿 da xiong bao dian" will ONLY be used on Buddhist temple (usually on the main temple) Another suggestion for the Han building is adding "阙que" (stone pillars gate) on some main building like town center, fortress, wonders. As the "que" structure were greatly used in the Han dynasty.

Perhaps a more realistic mechanic for the princess would be some bonus that she confers to the civ to which she is sent. For example, the princess would have to be garrisoned in one of the other civ's civic centres, and would then give that building faster training for women, stronger capture resistance, more capture points, or some other good bonus. To additionally represent a strengthened alliance, perhaps the Hans could be able to build their buildings within the territory influence of that civic centre as well, or within a certain distance of it. I don't know if that is possible, but it would be interesting. The benefit of this approach is that it actually would strengthen alliances. Since the civ to which the princess is sent would only get her bonus while they're allied with her player, they would want to keep that alliance. The bonus would have to be good enough to provide a strong incentive, but not a direct offensive military bonus that would make them too strong. This would be a more realistic, organic way to simulate a stronger alliance.

This camp was very good to congratulate, it reminds me how much it is possible to create new structures using only existing elements. You can create a separate mod with this mechanic, if we think about it there should be an interesting diplomatic mechanic for several civs already present in 0ad, to which in the future you can add them too.

in turn they are ideas from other games. that yes well corrected, and joint.

@ValihrAnt wanted to add colonies to every faction. Maybe we could give Romans instead of a colony something like an allied village, functioning like a colony but being able to train auxiliary units.

True, but they don't add anything to the roster.

Maybe bonus to recruit cheaper. Auxiliar camp.

they should recruit auxiliary troops like Cretan archers and Numidian cavalry, elephants,slingers

I always thought that the Roman roster is very limited (and boring), and was wondering why that huge empire wouldn't have access to more kinds of units. So I'd welcome additions to their roster, but don't if it should be a matter of luck/captured buildings.

Another possibility would be to give rome auxiliary units, but no structure to train them. So they can only train them once the Romans conquer a barracks/stable/CC from a different faction.

Yeah, I definitely agree. After spending several hours trying, we haven't worked out how to make the roads go around hills, mountains, and shoreline yet. Thanks. And actually, as shown in the screenshot, the gap between players' bases changes based on the number of players and size of the map. This is 2v2 on a Medium map.

I think this (rank upgrades) is a great dimension to add to the game. It can go some lengths to distinguish booming versus military empowerment. I think there should be a longer term economic cost to these upgrades, and it I wonder if you would support the possibility that getting all of these upgrades for all units is actually a strategic failure. rank 2/3 units get worse at gathering, and an enemies rank 2/3 unit composition is beating your rank 2/3 composition, but your units in your base gathering res are also rank 2, so you are losing overall. I have been wondering what these Advanced, and Elite upgrades should cost: Advanced: 300 food 300 wood 200 metal 1:45 research time, adds 5 metal cost (and +25 food for cav) to unit and 10% training time Elite: 500 food 500 wood 500 metal 2:00 research time, adds another 10 metal cost (and +40 food for cav) to unit and further 20% training time This adds the economic question for the player: do I want to get blacksmith upgrades, postpone the choices for advanced/elite upgrades, and maintain my eco, or do I want to get this upgrade that empowers my units, but add an economic liability to them. Getting these upgrades is basically a "bet" on that unit, and since the upgrade has a long time to research, the timing could be complicated, so you could not always get it as an emergency reaction. Should any civs get a p1 advanced rank upgrade, or would this be to easy to do a rush with, despite the large cost and economic situation? My thinking is that champions could stay being trained at barracks, but upgrade to enable it could add some extra food and some metal and stone cost, by default train at fort with no unlock. I certainly agree that in a25 it is too easy to mass champions at a sudden time, but I think there should be a way to go: non-rank-upgraded CS, +champions strategy. @Dizaka @chrstgtr @ValihrAnt @Palaiologos @LetswaveaBook what do you think about @wowgetoffyourcellphone's concept, and my ideas on those upgrades?

The fact that the current climate change is caused by humans is also supported by Earth Sciences. I mean, CO2 is known for a long time as an important driver of Earth's climate: (this is geologist Richard Alley invited at the National Academy of Sciences (US) for a presentation)

I wonder how many travel hours, CPU power etc. were used to create such reports.

This was made a long time ago trying to follow somehow the rome range "Byz Range".