Leaderboard

Recently stumbled across 0AD, which I'm now running on two different Linux platforms (Arch/Manjaro), and am keenly impressed. Can't thank those behind this effort enough for making such a fascinating FOSS opportunity to enjoy a rich and well-conceived RTS game. In trying to absorb the basics, input controls, build/boom methods, and - most recently - the armed conflict aspects of 0AD, I've come across some seemingly odd behavior. I will make a separate post about that shortly... Meanwhile, just wanted to express my gratitude to those who have supported this project for all these years. Hopefully I too can contribute in some way over time.

We don't need to reinvent the wheel, we can use the items from the market that we already have and just change the roof and the texture that is used on it.

Finds from Großromstedt https://archive.org/details/eichhorn-1927-grossromstedt

The actual consensus is that the migration period helmets come from the Sassanian/Parthian helmets. This is the origin of the so-called Spangenhelm and Roman ridge helmets. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spangenhelm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamellar_helmet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Roman_ridge_helmet https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1058733865261502465.html But it is plausible the Germanic auxiliaries at this time got their helmets from the Sarmatians or the Dacians. Which would be an earlier version of the segmented helmets. A different branch. Those are nicknamed "skeleton helmets" although this is not a suitable name from a typological pov. Some people think it is related to the Samartian find from Stanica Tbilisskaya: And it is indeed true that later Germans used such design for their helmets. Here is Thorsberg helmet: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorsberger_Moor And here is Benty Grange helmet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benty_Grange_helmet Valsgarde 6 helmet (burial N°6): Valsgarde 5 helmet (burial N°5):

Hey, Welcome to the forums, very pleased you like the game.

I am also trying to figure out a way to bring back badoso mod to life. I have already learned how to create a mod by stealing code from feldfeld I am on my way to bring back pre fixed positions for players which was working fine in badoso's mod, even though I never tried it before, It is a nice Idea. @hamdich is behind this idea. I am also trying to remove all deers in belgian uplands for reza-math.

Hello, I find the current situation pleasant. Having small armies of 30-50 units at the start of the game (less than 10min of play) or large armies of 100 to 160 units after 13-14 minutes of play suits me. Of course it depends on the maps and if we have been quiet for boom. I like having time to fight, I mean it In fights I like to have time to replace units, bring in reinforcements, bypass. We are far from total war but I find it nice. 0AD does much better than other rts on the duration of fights (for example AOE2 it's really boring and fast). To facilitate the management of your army I advise you to use the groups of units (if you do not already do it) ctrl 1 ctrl 2 etc and use shift for add unit to group. Of course I would like units to be slightly bigger and spaced out when moving. --- One could imagine a MOD 0 AD with a really different game from a military point of view. In Warcraft 3. About twenty units, quite large on the screen, a significant amount of life points. and skills for the most part for a lot of micro management in the fights but it will surely be less charming on the attractive antique aspect. --- A 0AD with battalions can be cool too, to see how it is managed.. A city phase and city development then a battle phase in the middle of the map in battalion mode.. a mod already exists?

Ah, I was think civ bonus—not team bonus. My mistake. For trade, I think making traders=0 pop would be a good first step. Right now trade isn’t viable because it slows growth at the cost of men. It’s a good long term play but picking that strat usually means you never get to late game. We could set a trader limit to prevent it from getting OP

Where would that go? Looks like a good start regardless. EDIT: Oh I see, the center. Maybe the roof can just be some sticks?

Opinions....

It seemed like "hate" is a strong word.

the first thing is to get the base design. in this case I copied it using the colour range selector. now it is time to transform it to vector(vectorial graphic art).

I think of crush as damage that can best be avoided by dodging. So generally lightly armed, agile units would have the most crush resistance. Shields give pierce armor, and body armor and melee weapons both give hack armor. I prefer using regular unit stats rather than artificial counters to make some units good against others, but we need a full system of unit counters unless we add some other major effects to the game, like different terrains giving different advantages for instance; it's important that we be different from other games by having features they don't, not by lacking features they have. I'm neutral on the unit specific upgrades, I'd have to try them some to decide if they function as just general buffs or if they change the way units can be used. I think I like the fire arrows idea; they should slow the attack rate so for a lot of units they wouldn't help much, but should make archers effective against siege and wooden buildings. That would change archers role pretty significantly though, we'd have to test and see how it works out.

Loot would be a decent bonus by itself if it was addition based rather than multiplying to already quite low loot values. Maybe +10 food for each woman kill and + 5 food, 5 wood for men kills. There is also no problematic interactions with other bonuses or civ specifics as far as I am aware.

My only concern is stacking the speedy skirms/slingers team bonus for brits with other speed buffs like Viriato from ibers. That would make their skirms 15 m/s which is comparable to cavalry.

Maybe just apply to inf. Merc cav is still quite strong I also would never want cav to train as fast as men, especially if the cav is barely more expensive and starts at level 2 The proposal in its current form would make cav have a much higher attack, much higher health, and get to the fight much quicker than CS inf. Their cost would also be basically the same since in terms of res cost and time to collect needed res (because food gather so much slower than metal). Add on top that all those advantages plus train time, res cost, and res gather time would also exist with respect to merc cav vs CS cav

Guerrila: The preponderance of throwing spears, and the near total absence of body armour, indicate that the style of warfare was highly mobile and loosely formed, based around raiding and short. Javelins +10% movement speed. New healer aura: Deas Celtica: Soldiers +10% attack damage. Javelin infantry moved to village phase. Increases the number of units available to early rush, also historical accuracy of the predominance of javelins. Fortress can be built in neutral territory. There were small villages with centralized fortresses. With the root territory of the fortress, it is possible to build small bases, great for small attacks with chariots and other units. Some new technology Sevili Dusios / bodypainting tech.

No, I mean that the apm required on 0AD is lower than on other RTS. And I find it better. There are still a lot of things done to make unit production easy to launch. It's always a few clicks saved

thats fine, at least community mod guys are doing more good than bad, i think eventually a lot of things will get fixed, but a bit better organization and orientation for goals would help speed things up like 10 times. what is your ingame name @ChronA

Am I the only one who hates the hard counter systems present on each unit like in age of empire?

I believe "for carthage perhaps: -50% mercentary train time." This is historical accurate upgrade actually. Since carthages heavily relay on merce for war. insteand of -50% if we can have -20% train time :p. Anyways good work on keeping track of change on what is agreed and not.

Well, I think athens is pretty good now: "democracy" CC techs (including phase up) -50% research time -30% cost. Carthage could maybe be a more impactful trade bonus, potentially: cheaper, faster training traders, markets too maybe. I think kush is acceptable (maybe just an improvement like I did for seles), which really leaves brits, Han, and probably mauryans.

Athens Brits Carth Han Kush Most of them really. But a lot of it is fixing underlying problems with trade/healers

That just means those units need to be better balanced. I would be fine with any of the options proposed by @real_tabasco_sauce. The carry capacity one would be an interesting p1 buff that could make their gameplay a little more interesting. It could also have a non-noticeable game impact, though. Old building pop bonus from a23? Or can we apply that elsewhere? That was one of the more unique and fun bonuses imo

I think that ranged cav are the best units this alpha, so I caution against buffing them. I would rather see changes made to make trading more important.

SPI does work with a law firm but I don't know if they will help us in a timely fashion. (My experience has not been good in this respect.) I'm not sure I would handle this using legal means anyway. I would just write Steam and ask to take it down, and see what they say. I doubt that Valve would want to keep the game on their platform against the creators' wishes. That would be an unnecessary legal and PR risk on their side.

for example this is Numidian. por ejemplo esto es númida

Identity Markers in South-Western Fazzan Were the People of the Wadi Tanzzuft/Tadrart Akakus Region Garamantes? gatto2019.pdf

A short article about it : The Garamantes of Fazzan.pdf @Lopess do you have the lead on this faction?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germa The Archaeology of Fazzan, Volume 1 - Synthesis https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/54515 The Archaeology of Fazzan, Volume 2 - Site Gazetteer, Pottery and other Survey Finds https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/54095 The Archaeology of Fazzan, Volume 3 - Excavations https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/54108 The Archaeology of Fazzan, Volume 4 - Survey and Excavations at Old Jarma (Ancient Garama) https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/54098 Edit: "Gaetuli" y Roma - XV Semana de la Ciencia https://www.academia.edu/29611766/_Gaetuli_y_Roma_XV_Semana_de_la_Ciencia

Feldmap is on mod.io

interesting. maybe we would actually see more strategies with longer battles. while 0ad takes skill in multiplayer, huge chunk of that skill is basically how fast you can build whole kingdom and army. I know there are people who can attack you from 4 sides in same time while improving their eco but majority of matches in multiplayer are decided by how fast players can reach full pop. if battles were less about unit spam, but more about how you use these units - wouldnt that breed more strategies and strategists? also please make it so ranged units arent always the strongest units because that kills any possible battle plan other than spamming melee cannon fodder and putting it in front of ranged units. and perhaps add counters to the game and make them strong enough to make it impossible to ignore them. that will make battles more significant. right now the battles are basically 'who has more DPS' thus players only play the civs with highest dps, and recruit only 1-2 type of units with said highest dps. Thats just boring approach to the battle. But counters add some more rules. Example: if enemy1 sends cavalry during a battle, enemy2 should call their sword formation back, and put their pike formation forward. this will require players to recruit more types of units than just <ranged units as dps + some spearmen as cannon fooder + swordsmen against rams>.

I see it working now, thanks.

The bounty is the release with the fixes

Now available inside the game in mod downloader.

in most RTS the spam is fought with area damage units. Even Clash royale have this mechanic. Sometimes they are tank-type units. StarCraft 2. part of stopping spams are units that do a lot of area damage.

What I really experienced as positive about the AoE2 community on voobly, is that how easy it was to play with modded settings. If someone felt that there was a better way to generate the map, they would install the map and people joining the lobby would automatically download it and be able to play on it.

I committed the updated textures just now.

I'd like to There is just nothing I tried in the past three years to make changes to the lobby that ever worked. That makes it sound like user1 is completely to blame for the lack of software upgrades to the lobby. Let's please avoid placing blame because I'm sure that not only one person is to blame for the impasse. How about let's share responsibility and look for ways to help that are within our own scope of responsibility, such as "find a C++ coder" for the 0 A. D. lobby improvements. Last I checked there's over $30k in the account for WFG in case there is not a C++ coder available willing to donate time. Another idea: offer to help Dunedan with the CI and pipelines on Github for the lobby server software in a way that does not require giving you administrative privileges. Ask what exactly they're stuck on, provide instructions and pointers to articles that answer questions, provide advice on best practices and anecdotes about how similar problems were solved elsewhere.

If there is no one with the official role in WFG of drafting legal terms, then the word responsible is still appropriate. It means who has accepted the responsibility for this task? If collecting email addresses is not the course of action that WFG wants to take then what solutions are being implemented to ensure that bans are effective? Here are some ideas from others, as well as from me. Improve the rate limit for new account creation per IP. Someone said that an IP can create 1 account per hour. Consider adjusting this to, for example, 1 account per month. I think that Gmail allows 10 email addresses to be created from a certain IP before they require a mobile phone number to be attached to a new account. Make account age public for all users to see. Also, make rated game record and rating unspoofable. Regularly scan for weak passwords, and lock accounts with weak passwords. Ban them if there is no password reset capability. Allow free registration without an email address, but establish a policy where all new accounts are "unverified" and have limited privileges. Allow "verified" users to host games that are only open to other "verified" accounts. Changing an account to "verified" requires 3 referrals from existing "verified" accounts, which will lose their own "verified" status if they commit fraud, and also requires an email address and dossier to be filled out. The purpose of the dossier is to have consistency of individual identity across duplicate accounts. Allow use of aliases in order to protect players from bullying or targeting, but require that the aliases are tied to a "verified" account in order to make rule enforcement effective. What's happening with the status quo is that the cost of player misconduct and easy duplicate account creation is being externalized to the player base, especially those players who regularly host games. This still has an impact on WFG, of course, as it causes players to consider leaving or at least withdrawing support for WFG. Case in point: go2die's retiring from the WFG forum yesterday.

Hi, I'm always bothered with delayed searches on this forum. After a regular quick search, I often need to switch to the advanced search and add a detail for accurate results. I've been asked to wait 5 seconds before searching again and I've been waiting for 10 seconds before clicking on "search". The result : wait for much longer before searching again ! So I gave up with this really boring feature that looks useless...

Hi everybody, no version update here, just a little piece of information from the author of the LocalRatings mod (me). The next LocalRatings version (v0.26.1) will be released as soon as the new 0 A.D. Alpha 26 is out. I am impatient to play the new Alpha26 and to see how players' statistics change. As you may know, there will be a new civilization, the Han Chinese and it will be interesting to see how players perform with it. And speaking of civilizations... here's a preview of what you will find in the next LocalRatings version! Yes, per-civ statistics. Cool, isn't it? This is one of many new changes and features I have been working on. It will help giving a more concrete idea on civilization balance and I'm very curious to see what the Han Chinese civilization will reveal! I will provide a full list of new features when the release day comes. For the moment, if any of you wants to try it in advance, you can download the zip file of the development version (or download it manually from the GitLab page). It runs on both A25 and A26. I appreciate any feedback, in particular regarding the new explanatory page, that can be opened from the "About Local Ratings" button on the top of the page. Surely more content can be added and the English might not be perfect (my mother tongue is not English), so I appreciate any suggestion in that sense. Other type of feedback is welcome too. Should you have any thought, feel free to send me a private message. Thanks and... see you on A26!

What I would like to have is the opportunity to take a saved game, and use it as starting conditions for a new match. You can then change/rotate the player, alter difficulty or change some other game specific parameters. This would be like turning the board in chess. It would allow to figure out whether in a specific situation you would be able to "save the situation" in the position of player xy or not by taking his position.

Would be cool to see some siege assault towers for the Romans. So to see bridges, to have the Romans able to build bridges. Would like also to see a Cesar unit, and Pompey, so other late Republic units. Just saying.

Hi all! I'm currently in the process of reorganizing the the unit actors and unit textures in the development (SVN) repo. Please bear with me if you're an SVN player. The rest of the changes will take perhaps the rest of this week. It'll be worth it, as the reorganization helps the art team moving forward and makes it easier to maintain assets. And as I'm going through everything I'm improving textures, actors, and adding some new things here and there. So content wise, everything will look nicer to the end user. Lastly, I'm deleting old lower resolution lower quality textures and unused textures (trust me, in the end you won't miss them). This will reduce graphics memory load. So, sit tight. My project shouldn't last much longer.

Uh oh

@Sundiata Maybe that could make a new civ for terra magna, but I need someone like @LordGood to make me that roof texture

Illustrations of Japan during 0AD's timeframe So I have a bunch of Japanese references I collected but never shared before... This is mostly Yayoi period, and a little Jomon period. I actually think this civilisation can be done... The biggest issue, just off the top of my head, is: no cavalry... Here's a full unit roster... How 'bout that... Temple: The following images are mostly very high quality reconstructions from the Yoshinogari archaeological park: "Yoshinogari (吉野ヶ里 遺跡 Yoshinogari iseki) is the name of a large and complex Yayoi archaeological site in Yoshinogari and Kanzaki in Saga Prefecture, Kyūshū, Japan. According to the Yayoi chronology established by pottery seriations in the 20th century, Yoshinogari dates to between the 3rd century BC and the 3rd century AD. However, recent attempts to use absolute dating methods such as AMS radiocarbon dating have shown that the earliest Yayoi component of Yoshinogari dates to before 400 BC." -wikipedia- Civic Center: Farmstead: Houses: Special building: Walls: Other stuff: