Leaderboard

he starts sending ton of tribute, i had to pause so messages are visible(already gg, ofc) i tell him to resign, he says "im leaving bye" and abandons. then he says in general chat that he resigned, while im afk(writing this). i ended game, alegedly he resigned, then he wont give points ofc(no point transfer since i ended) stupid way to abandon game and pretend it wasnt his fault, ofc wont give points after either. heres replay, and screenshots. commands.txt metadata.json

@Stan`@borg- It would be nice to add some features to Persians for the first release candidate. So I would like to get some indication on when and what is happening. I think @real_tabasco_sauce has put forward a bold approach on differentiating the axe cavalry. My suggestion would be that @borg- creates a patch that does not conflict with @real_tabasco_sauce axe cavalry. I think it is fair to accept the proposal of @real_tabasco_sauce as an essential part of a community project is respecting the proposals of other people. I would like to ask borg- what his plans are for his patch on RC1. Finally: Stan` can you give a deadline for patches to be shaped and accepted for the first release candidate?

@vinme This thread might be the right for you

Not if you consider -500 B.C. -1 B.C. as one timeframe. Anyway it's all pointless now. I'd be glad to have the civs for 0 A.D: Empires Besieged

Offence Reporting It is necessary for you to create a post on this thread detailing the incident and including the replay file. When reporting a player, it is mandatory to upload the correct replay. Instructions: Locate replay at Main Menu/Multiplayer/Replays Select replay and note replay file path. Go to path in your file manager, locate the file named "commands.txt" Upload commands.txt to the Forums (account creation required) Tag @user1 Please state your lobby username and the lobby username of the offending player. You will not be notified of the result automatically, you may view the ongoing status of our progress at the bottom of this first post. Find more detailed instructions below:   Progress Report: @Xander12 @gameraj @Nympheuz @raffut1969 @donkenburger @e.v @petiprg

A Quick Introduction Hello Everyone! Since this is my first post on the 0AD forums, i would like to start with a quick introduction. I've come to know about 0AD quite recently and been playing it since May 2021 (single-player). I have played quite a few RTSs already (namely Age of Empires II, Age of Mythology, Warcraft 3 and StarCraft), but this was the first game that i ever saw a Batch Training mechanic and i love it! Fun aside though, i also started doing some tests to try and use this mechanic to it's fullest potential. In this regard, 0AD sets itself apart from those other games i mentioned because it is an Open Source Project so I could go through the code more easily to unearth the formulas, modifiers, etc in order to make my analyses. So without further ado, let's do some math! The Mechanic Unveiled First things first: How is Batch Training implemented? As far as resource costs and population growth is concerned, there are no changes, but training time (for each individual unit) is greatly reduced using the following formula: BatchTime = BaseTime * (#Units ^ Mod) Where: BaseTime = The time it takes to train a single unit #Units = The size of the group Mod = Modifier, a value that is intrinsic to the Building Type and determines the reduction in Training Time. List of Modifiers: Houses: 1.0 (meaning, Batch training in houses does not reduce training times) Corral, Market, Siege Workshop, Elephant Stable, Special Buildings: 0.7 Barrack, Stable, Fortress, Civic Centre, Carthage Embassies: 0.8 Let's illustrate this with an example: Unit: Spartan Hoplite – From Civic Center (Mod: 0.8) BaseTime = 10 secs #Units 1 by 1 - Time (s) Batched Time (s) 2 20 17.41 3 30 24.08 4 40 30.31 5 50 36.24 So, as seen in the exemple above, Batch Training reduces the training time of units considerably and, on the surface, it appears to be always better to Batch train instead of training 1by1. However there is a tradeoff. You'll only have said units at the end of the entire Training period (which is longer than the time to train a single unit). What this means is that 1by1 will give you readily available units sooner, but in smaller quantities, while Batching will give you readily available units later, but in larger quantities. This is a point to consider, specially in the early game, where we want to gather resources as fast as possible to build up our economy and our army. If we call the amount of time a unit is out on the map ActiveTime (as in it can perform actions such as move, gather, fight, etc), we can say that the method that gives us more ActiveTime overall will be better. Analysis Let's use our Spartan Hoplite to understand this problem. Spartan Hoplite – From Civic Center (Mod: 0.8) BaseTime = 10 secs Let's say we train 2 units using both methods: From our table we gather that 1by1 will produce a unit after 10 secs and another after 10 more seconds, while batching will produce 2 units after 17.41 secs. This means that both methods don't generate any ActiveTime in the first 10 seconds (since no units are out yet) and will start generating the same amount after 20 secs (when the second unit of 1by1 gets done). So what we can compare is the amount of ActiveTime generated after 10 secs but before 20, for both methods. Do note that each unit out on the map generates 1 sec of ActiveTime for each in-game second. This means that 2 units will generate 2 secs for each in-game second and so on. With that in mind we can do the calculations and reach the following table: #Units = 2 Time Elapsed (s) 1 by 1 Batching #Units Produced ActiveTime(s) #Units Produced ActiveTime(s) 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 17.41 1 7.41 2 0 20 2 10 2 5.18 #Units = 3 Time Elapsed (s) 1 by 1 Batching #Units Produced ActiveTime(s) #Units Produced ActiveTime(s) 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 20 2 10 0 0 24.08 2 18.16 3 0 30 3 30 3 17.76 #Units = 4 Time Elapsed (s) 1 by 1 Batching #Units Produced Total ActiveTime (s) #Units Produced Total ActiveTime(s) 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 20 2 10 0 0 30 3 30 0 0 30.31 3 30.93 4 0 40 4 60 4 38.76 As we can see, although batching reached the total amount of units faster than 1by1, that amount of Active time generated in the same period heavily favors 1by1. Now let's see if this trend continues and calculate the percentages to see by how much 1 by 1 is beating Batching. # Units 1 by 1 Batching Percentage (%) Total ActiveTime (s) Total ActiveTime(s) 2 10 5.18 51.8 3 30 17.75 59.17 4 60 38.74 64.57 5 100 68.81 68.81 6 150 108.42 72.28 7 210 157.97 75.22 8 280 217.76 77.77 9 360 288.04 80.01 10 450 369.04 82.01 27 3510 3519.02 100.26 Interesting! As we increase the amount of units trained, Batching slowly catches up to 1 by1 and by the time we reach 27 units, Batching will match 1by1 in Total ActiveTime generated. We can also see that any number of units above 27, Batching will start becoming more and more efficient. Naturally, 27 units costs an unfeasible amount of resources and time (specially in the early game) so we can conclude that by our metric of ActiveTime 1by1 is by far more productive than any amount of batching we can get in the early game. Conscription In the City Phase (last phase) we get access to the Conscription technology (in the barracks and the Stable). This technology lowers the Batch Training modifiers by 10% (Mod = 0.8 to Mod: 0.7) and that is a huge change. Lets do the same calculation, but now with Mod = 0.7. # Units 1 by 1 Batching Percentage (%) Total ActiveTime (s) Total ActiveTime(s) 2 10 7.51 75.10 3 30 25.27 84.23 4 60 54.44 90.73 5 100 95.74 95.74 6 150 149.69 99.79 7 210 216.68 103.18 This means that in the late game (after researching Conscription), given enough resources, any Batch amount > 6 will be more efficient than training 1by1. That is also valid for all the buildings that naturally have Mod = 0.7. Discussion So, the main question that arises from this analysis is: Is the Batch mechanic useless in the early game? My answer is NO and here is my reasoning. THE GOOD: - Batching is great for early game rushes and timing attacks: since we'll be able to pump units much faster that by building 1by1 and we can't afford to build multiple barracks or stables in the early game. - Batching is great for dumping excess resources: Stockpiling resources isn't advisable, since resources don't produce anything while sitting in the bank. Unfortunately it happens sometimes, so if we find yourselves with excess Food, we can just build a Stable and Batch train some horses to explore the map and harass our opponent. - Batching gives options instead on limiting them: If Batching was universally better than 1by1 then there would be no point in having having a choice. By having it's drawbacks, Batching gives more variety to the game by enabling certain strategies. THE BAD: - Batching is less flexible than 1by1: By Batching, we sink a lot of resources and have to wait a considerable amount of time for them to bear fruits. This means that if we need to cancel some of our productions in other to gather resources to build an upgrade or advance phases, the amount of time lost training that group can be great. - Batching eats a lot of population: Population is also a resource. So if we want to Batch train a large group we need to have space available. Also, we'll need to quickly build houses to open more space to not get capped and keep producing out of our other buildings. THE UGLY: - Batching is eclipsed by 1by1 for economy: Since much of our goals in the early game is to boost our economy as fast as possible (and we do that by maximizing ActiveTime), batching does the exact opposite of what it's expected of it. And now in A25, the introduction of the Autoqueue mechanic basically kills batching even more for early game economy. Closing Remarks Well, that's basically all i had to say about the subject. I hope this post wasn't too boring and you were able to enjoy it. I would also like to read your opinions and comments on the matter. If you agreed or disagree with this analysis and why? Any concerns or constructive criticisms are always welcome. See you on the forums and have fun! ===================================//================================== TL;DR (just in case) Which is more efficient in the early game: training in batches or training units 1by1? Well, 1by1 will give you readily available units sooner, but in smaller quantities, while Batching will give you readily available units later, but in larger quantities. By comparing the Total ActiveTime (the amount of time a unit is on the map, ready to move, gather, fight, etc) in both approaches, we get: - From the Barracks, Stable or Civic Center: 1by1 is more efficient if the batch size is smaller than 27. Since batches of 27 are basically impossible in the early game, for economy purposes, 1by1 if far better than any amount of batching. -Batching is better than 1by1 in strategies involving rushes or timing attacks. ==================================================================== EDIT 1: So, considering what @Jofursloft and @Freagarach have said in the their posts, i redid the calculations for batching and 1by1 considering more productions cycles and the ProgressTimeout delay that autoqueue gives. To avoid making this post bigger than it already is, i placed the the calculations and the result tables in the attached pdf. In general, smaller batches (2 to 3 units) break even with 1by1 by the 3rd production cycle, while bigger batches (5 and upwards) break even by the second production cycle. Things are a bit less efficient if you use autoqueue, but not by much. So, as long as you can batch units constantly, batching will always be better than 1by1. Also, the bigger the batch size, the better. Batching Revisited.pdf

I am on a tour of La Tigra temperate forest. This temperate forest, typical of the highlands of Mesoamerica.

maybe not design error: it makes sense that ranged units firing "at will" would shoot the closest unit (most threatening), but there should other ways to control ranged units, like attack ground, so that the player has another option.

I have been archer harassed in some 1v1s by Mauryans. Even though I was Ptolemies, there is no way of leaving a skirmish without taking hits because the archers always outrange you and can chase you safely when you want to retreat. I also use archers to hit enemy units hiding behind many structures or pathfinding difficulties. I find archers very useful, although I wouldn't spam them as my staple ranged output.

just give to all ranged units the same stats already, if you want them all to play the same way. that won't be much different than increasing their speed, just less engaging I guess. don't need it, they do fine already against cav. The biggest issue with archers is they rarely actually employ their range, because they are defaulted to shooting the closest unit (this also results in a lot of overkill because a single unit is likely to be the closest for a large percent of a group of archers). You have a couple of micro options: if you manually target unit after unit in a group of enemies, there will also be much overkill, unless you only use 15 to 20 archers. The last option is to hold 'alt' or 'option' and individually target enemies (one archer, one enemy). This option eliminates overkill, but takes a long time to kill the targeted units, especially if the archers have no accuracy buff. This is why I advocate for attack-ground (basically volleys), as this would be a means for archers (and other ranged units) to attack a large group of units at range with a uniform damage distribution. Ideally, it would achieve an effect between the two existing micro options and provide an additional engaging skillset to the game. However, I would say something along these lines should wait until after some performance improvements.

Doctor Organisms. but to get @user1's attention and to get points... ah! maybe you wanted to let everyone know what a bad person doctor organism is.

What about units after using the same pass for a few time creates tracks automatically? That could create à bonus for gathering after a few time using same way. Also when scouting the opponent, we could discover those tracks and guess if he was hunting there, or if he moved his troops to that direction .... that could help us finding cc and other buildings! insane!

At the end of the Han Dynasty, this animal was close to extinction, but at the beginning of the Han Dynasty, there were still distributions in the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River and the Yangtze River.

@Lopess @Duileoga and me We ara beginning to understand each other better. To this just add help by Wow, some of your experience and @m7600 @trinketos can contribute. @AIEND can join.

Probably because they didn't expect it to take that much time. Also to better represent factions not to miw too much evolutions. But as I said to someone we can work on part 2 civ now. I just have no one to do it.

Thank you, this is amazing. Could these two documents and the path page be stickied? Path page: simulation in ps/trunk/binaries/data/mods/public – Wildfire Games When I came to these forums I read the tutorials that I could find and often use the search function. I really find what I am looking for - but you guys have been amazing. I think these two documents would have substantially helped me and cut down on all my questions (and so saved you all some time). I have decided to learn Java so maybe one day I can help with the game - I am on my second lesson and loving it! Really appreciate all the help.

I can only find the climate distribution map of modern China, but I haven't found the ancient one, only this map of temperature changes from ancient times to the present.

I want to emphasize one point about climate change, especially ancient China was warmer and wetter than it is now. Northwest China, which is now considered to be an arid region, used to have large forests. If we make ancient maps, this must be paid attention to.

@Duileoga este paseo lo hice yo. @Trinketos @Lopess pueden sacar texturas de aqui, las fotos las tome yo.

Yes, I also thought about that possibility, it is something to be taken into consideration. anyway, thanks. I'll be doing the first patch soon, with the simplest changes that were generally better accepted.

just give to all ranged units the same stats already, if you want them all to play the same way. that won't be much different than increasing their speed, just less engaging I guess. don't need it, they do fine already against cav.

No, because the archers will be able to fire, retreat then fire again. There will be no counter.

I don't think archer are supposed to be able to fight or escape from a charging mob of javelineers, they are supposed to beat them by staying at standoff range with a meatshield or buildings protecting them from the enemy. If archers could also kite other ranged infantry that would once again turn them into a very hard counter to all infantry units, which does not seem in the spirit of 0 AD. Plus a speed change would boost their economic value and create chaos for civ balance (again).

Missed opportunity: Writing in the title "The good, the batch and the ugly" ;-)

there very little light because the weather was a little rainy. I estimate it was between 16 and 14 degrees.

or simply a good amount of lag or a pause, then it only requieres a bad internet connection, someone else dropping or a bad excuse. That's where the design flaw is.