Leaderboard

To clarify some assumptions about what information we store server-side and can make available to 0ad clients: 0ad only sends game reports for rated 1vs1 games to the lobby bots (see https://github.com/0ad/0ad/blob/3faa301ee914b82b1bfd89f2e89bc6392e244997/binaries/data/mods/public/gui/session/lobby/LobbyRatingReporter.js#L55-L56). Therefore we have no record of unrated or multiplayer games with more than two players in our database. That's because the bots were built for two purposes: enabling multiplayer functionality and keeping track of ratings. For both of that keeping track of unrated or non 1vs1 games wasn't necessary. Detecting smurfs wasn't a requirement back then. I'd be open to store reports of unrated and non 1vs1 multiplayer games as well, to be able to provide more information like aggregated values of play rated and unrated games to 0ad clients, if the consensus is that this would be useful. Doing so would not only require changes to 0ad, but to the lobby bots as well. Regarding the account creation date: We do store the date when players create an account, but that's not accessible to the lobby bots right now. Here is the database structure EcheLon, the bot responsible for handling rating related stuff, uses: https://github.com/0ad/lobby-bots/blob/8549e62dd40fd582412b4c8fc829fc672e8ddd17/xpartamupp/lobby_ranking.py. From that you can see that players have no date associated with them. You might also notice that we don't store the date for when a game happened. My proposal here is to change that so that EcheLOn stores the date whenever he gets the first request for returning player information (which happens immediately after player registration) and to store the date a game finished, based on the time its reports get submitted to EcheLOn, as well. I believe storing the dates is a no-brainer and something we should do in any case. After implementing that, we could return the registration for all players created after the change to 0ad clients. Independently from smurf detection that's probably something which would be interesting to display in the player profile. Last but not least there is some point I'm wondering about, which hasn't been addressed yet (unless I've missed it). In this thread there seems to be the assumption that the logic for smurf detection will be integrated into the 0ad client. I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to do that server side, as that'd allow adjustments of the "smurf detection algorithm" between 0ad releases and would allow incorporation information into the algorithm which might not be suitable to return to 0ad clients (e.g. for privacy reasons). When doing the detection server-side only some kind of "smurf likelihood score" would need to be made available for 0ad clients. What are your thoughts on that?

It worked, thank you! Here's the current progress if you all are wondering what's new.

Spaces are forbidden

It's an arbitrary name.

I don't see the issue. the problem whith cavalry death balls is not vision. I guess we can equalize the vision ranges of cav and inf, but the way it is now is ok by me.

Hey everyone, one question regarding the UI, specifically about the order the buildings are displayed in the building tab. Do you prefer if they are sorted: Left: First by function (eco, trade, unit production, defense ect...) and then by strength / phase or Right: First by phase and then by function

https://code.wildfiregames.com/rP27023

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/27022

the game changed a lot from A24, battles are a lot quicker now. where it was once important to stream reinforcements towards a current push, now it's more usual to just retreat when out of juice and regroup/pause to do eco/fortify. the game is different now and micro has changed too.

maybe this should counted as a win (as seeh win vs Petreo ) :

@maroder

Clearly the server didn't crash, otherwise you would not have been able to rejoin. In fact, I don't see any evidence of a process crash (forceful termination of the process by the OS due to fatal error) by either player in the video. Instead it looks like connection issues. Maybe the host pulled the network cable briefly each time after seeh reconnected... Anyway, not a bug. Also, it shouldn't be counted as a win for either player without reviewing the replay. @seehI recommend submitting this to the ratings disputes and offence reporting thread. Also, many 1v1 players don't allow spectators due to the risk that they reveal information to a player, either overtly or covertly.

I just meant that alre's comment that (to paraphrase) "back in alpha 24 it was important to stream reinforcements" would seem to imply that in alpha 25 (and maybe the in development alpha 26) it is no longer vital to stream reinforcements like it used to be. I haven't kept up with the evolving 0 AD meta during alpha 25 unfortunately--haven't had the time--so I too was kind of hoping they would elaborate. Do they mean that the technique was more popular back then, or that some of the more prominent players made very good use of the technique at the time, or that alre personally has just not played that way a lot or maybe played many matches in general since a24? Certainly nothing about the game appears to have changed that would alter the foundations of gameplay so profoundly! The idea that continuous reinforcement is suddenly no longer required to sustain a push or was a special property of a specific alpha is very odd, I agree.

What's up with the City AND Village classes?

you are the only one in opposition to my knowledge.

exactly, the same goes for infantry. I bet you would like to escape infantry spearmen, but its very very easy since champion cavalry see farther than an outpost. you literally disagree everywhere, but I still have not seen why

If you as a player see somebody you consider a smurf, why do you need any codified algorithm at all? Wouldn't just not playing with this player be sufficient? I believe this thread is more about automated detection, which helps detecting non-obvious smurfs. I'd suggest not taking any preemptive action on server-side anyway, but instead leaving it up to players if they want to get likely smurfs tagged in the UI or even excluded from their games. That'd then have to implemented client-side.

You can zip it and upload anyway. Would probably be at the end of the mainlog or the top of the crashlog. GDB only works if you can reproduce the crash.

Thank you

Can't do much without a backtrace. @seeh does the replay keep crashing for you? Was there anything in the logs?

We can. Ask @user1 / @Dunedan what they think of it. Well if you guys have the time, sure, why not. Wonder if that's not already the case. We're already well known in the Open-source world. In fact we are the no1 package in the App Store list on many distributions, for our name starts with a 0. According to stats there are more Linux players than Windows players https://feedback.wildfiregames.com/os/ I've contacted a few streamers, most have not replied, or negatively, because their audience expect Starcraft or Age of Empires. I'm also doing a few events where I'll talk about the game. Not gonna lie though the things we need most right now are developers. @superflytom aka Tom0ad wanted to do that at some point. Dunno if he ever did.

I have never heard of google/pprof mentioned in the Geany wiki but this seems like the missing piece for the JS sampler I already have. It should be able to spit out such a graph for JS code as well.

Camel rushes are mainly viable because the Ptolemaic player has a better economy and can create the camels in unmatched numbers. In the scenario editor I matched an infantry archer against an cavalry archer in a duel and my experience is that the infantry archer won more often than it lost. Cavalry are units with a bigger footprint and are easier to hit. This (partially) offsets their higher HP. If cavalry late game deathballs needed to be nerfed, it would rather suggest to remove the+10% health upgrade. Furthermore the extra vision probably affect cavalry more in the early game than in the late game. Also, the player with the most cavalry might not always be the one benefiting the most from the extra vision. If I had only half as much cavalry as my opponent, I would very much like my cavalry to see the enemy cavalry from a larger range and escape. I don't think that reducing their vision actually solves the problem you are aiming at. However since I haven't tested it I can't say if less vision for the cavalry makes the game better or worse.

Ah good to know. The question was what to do for tech pairs, and your modifier to set their cost to 0 could be nice.

Thank you

I added a section to the wiki on how to generate that profiling info I originally got that info from the Geany project wiki @Stan`

I said it is a contributor. Obviously there are many other reasons. basically cavalry can see their main counter (spearmen) long before the spearmen can see them. Another example: camel rushes are easier to pull off because camels can see infantry archers before infantry archers can see camels.

Seeing it's a "Must Have" I'll just wait what happens within the next years.

The catapult is some kind of artillery, so isn't it logical that one can shoot beyond its own sight? There have been discussions about this, see the ticket and corresponding diff. https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/3517

IIRC space takes you to the last alarm (units fighting)

It is on my backlog for (not so many) year(s).

What was said before. I usually use the icons for loading / unloading:

So many good ideas, but no real results yet? banana world... no money involved = years to come to get bananas (fruits) Maybe we need some lottery winners to get moving... Best solution would be 0ad lobby server based... adding smurf tag to client @rossenburg is nice feature but still lacks the rest things around - at least make report smurf and sent it to somewhere on lobby server for further action... just waiting and believing moderators will inspect it and do something will not work, if they have also bad habbits... - can we get date of registration NOW? or WHEN? or not "available"? from communication above it is totally unclear - win ration is useless if smurf does not play rated games Scroll back there was great ideas already spoken, but execution is not here...

Suggestion to put a stop to the plague of rage-quitting/leaving games early on 0AD The Issue Hello all, after airing an idea to put a stop to rage-quitting and early leaving of games by players, it was suggested I come to the forums and post it here. I'm a casual 0AD player, and really returned to play after 4 years but I see the scourge of rage-quitting is still alive and well in the online game. It seems particularly prevalent amongst lower level players <1200 who may be new to the game or simply not want to lose their current rating. however, this has also happened to me when playing a highly rated prominent player within the 0ad community. In my experience, it usually occurs during the latter stages of a game when a player knows he//she has lost, but instead of taking the hit and losing some insignificant rating points, they will leave the game without resigning. This costs the opposing player the point that they would have won, and it is particularly galling after a game that may have lasted a long duration. As a player attempting to climb from a low rating, this has personally cost me a lot of points. For example, I played three rated matches today against players who were <1200, although they were still rated higher than me. In two of those games, the player left the game as it was clear I was getting the upper hand. In my opinion, something has to be done about this. I know players are encouraged to come on here and post then usernames of players who do not resign but this is far too much to ask. It has evidently not been effective and those who want to play casually will not do so. The rage-quit issue turns away new players from the game and discourages older players too. It often takes a duration to find a game with someone near your player level due to the relatively small player-base and one may often invest a long time in single games - so to be confronted by a rage-quitting opponent is totally discouraging. It has often led to me taking long spans away from the game. The Solution I propose the 'Chess.com model' be introduced to 0AD multiplayer gameplay. I call it the Chess.com model as the online chess website/app is somewhere that I have come across an aspect which may work for this game. Anyone that plays chess on the app knows that each game has a winner and a loser (it is free if anyone wants to see what I'm talking about). You cannot rage-quit a game and have your rating unaffected. This is not the case on 0AD. If a player leaves without resigning and the other player plays on until the end (when he wins), he is not rewarded with any points as the other player had left. Even if the player was rewarded, this still is not right as he may have to play for a significant time until he can destroy/conquer all the opposing player's structures. If a player leaves a chess match without resigning on chess.com (e.g say they close the tab on PC or close the mobile application), the opposing player is rewarded the victory (and rating points) if the other player does not return to the game in a certain amount of time. I believe this period is a minute although it could be extended to five or a bit more for the purposes of 0AD. This would allow players with internet problems or what not to return to the game while rage-quitters would be punished and the ethical player rewarded. I know sometimes players have emergencies or what not where they have to leave the game but there cannot be exceptions made for this either. At the end of the day, it is only rating points you lose, but if a player invests a lot of time in a game and is left with nothing for being the better user, this is not right. Chess.com also allows players to leave a game in its very early stages using the 'abort' feature, without damaging their rating. This could be implemented in 0Ad too, although I feel it is not important. I can articulate upon this more if needs be, but I would suggest anyone have a look at how Chess.com operates. This suggestion may attract criticism and it may not be perfect, but I believe it would significantly benefit the game an reward ethical players. It may also work to keep new players scorned by bad experiences. I know nothing of game development but I suspect this feature may not be too difficult to implement. Thank you for reading (my essay). I don't think I have posted before and I may never again as I am a very casual player but I feel this had to be said. Similar suggestions may have been posted here before and I apologize for my ignorance of any of those in advance.

I don't know why someone should do that, but it's maybe in this case the pattern could be broken up? true, maybe also in this case the pattern could be inactive the problem with differention by row is, that if 10 portraits fit into one row, with 11 buildings you would already need 2 rows and would have 9 unused spots in the second row. While with columns of 3, the need for space is less. If there are 4, then it would be 3 + 1, so only 2 unused spots. Also there are already 13 buildings for phase 1 for the Athenians e.g. One block for each phase: Sorted by function, how it looks in village phase: How it looks in city phase: so the late buildings are all downwards, i hope that'd be intuitive enough

@DarkcityI like your method of ranking smurfs, it will reduce the chance of wrong accusations. Problem: local ratings is just a number, sometimes it may be biased or anomalous. I would look closer at micro, eco and general playstyle instead of catching people out based on a single number. In addition, many players do not use local ratings nor would they have enough data for accurate ratings.

maybe like in the following? I think it would be nice to use "tabs" like in a browser: -"stats" tab -"history" tab -"builds" tab -"equipment" tab; I don't know if this is possible, but for some units it would be nice to have some information about the props, like the roman pilum, scutum or gladius; or the iberian falcata Also nice to have would be if you could press the upgrade buttons in the menu and you would instantly see how they effect the unit stats.

Can be nice to have indeed, i could look into it sometime. Ticket

By the way! Is there any button to "restore to defaults" for Map, Player and Game Type options? Restoring Settings from main menu does not works on this three tabs.

@DeWynter This mod adds a Death Match victory condition which researches all technologies for all players at the start. @Freagarach There might be a better place for this, or maybe VictoryConditions are actually Game Modes. EDIT: Not sure how tech works, but it seems I'm researching some stuff I shouldn't. deathmatch_gamemode.pyromod

1302 AD - Battle of the Golden Spurs

Every time I am about to win a game, enemy run away. For this time, I decided to report every such users because I know now how to report them. @user1 please report this user. Thank you My username: KpiTenBobZy Offender: mamasita11 metadata.jsoncommands.txt

Naked fanatic = no armour However, 'fanatic' suggests very fast speed and very high attack. So I propose 14m/s speed and 5 hack, 5 pierce with repeat time of 500ms