Leaderboard

Pikemen are clown units. They lose 1v1 against jav cav, while having 3x multiplier. They are only good for absorbing damage. Their design as clown units lies in their awkward stats. Spearmen and swordsmen are half decent, as they deal to little damage and need to approach their target to do damage. As army size increases, naturally melee units face more difficulties. In low numbers, the balance is fine. I would suggest to give melee units stronger offensive forge upgrades so they can keep competing with ranged units as the game progresses. In my view, melee units should dominate major battles and ranged units should be for harassment and minor support. Currently the high damage output of ranged units dominates battles.

I'd like to see an alpha where melee infantry are op for once.

YAYOI METALLURGY https://factsanddetails.com/japan/cat16/sub105/entry-5288.html

"Lead Sling Bullets" would be a good one, actually. Historically accurate as well. For sling bullets, it goes: Stone -> Clay -> Lead

see my two proposed "unit-specific" upgrades for pikemen: https://gitlab.com/real_tabasco_sauce/0-a-d-community-mod-unit-specific-upgrades/-/blob/unit_upgrades/community-mod/simulation/data/technologies/pike1.json https://gitlab.com/real_tabasco_sauce/0-a-d-community-mod-unit-specific-upgrades/-/blob/unit_upgrades/community-mod/simulation/data/technologies/pike2.json I tested these and they had a noticeable impact on the usefulness of pikemen. In addition to these upgrades, I think an increase in pierce damage, and maybe a decrease in hack armor to equal their pierce armor would be ideal.

Hello, I am also new here. I hope there will be a good gaming experience.

progress update on icons: Some "new" icons I edited XD. Handguard (swordsman), raiding cavalry (cavalry axeman), heavy shot (slinger), buttspike (pikeman) from left to right. all that remains to be made are: longer pikes, balanced javelins, scouting tactics (archer cavalry 1), cavalry heavy draw (archer cavalry 2), and husbandry (cavalry swordsman 1). if you are curious about the buttspike, this is the inspiration:

Again we are spinning in infinite circles. Why can't we find a way to balance phase 1 swords instead of making everything the same again? What I mean is that we must also keep the focus on diversification, if not, it will always be an alpha for changes and another for reversing the changes.

Anti-Spam Mechanic Suggestion For as long as I have been playing it, 0 A.D. has been having problems with balance. In each and every of the last 6 releases (or perhaps more) there has been 1 "op" unit. That unit got spammed, it's that simple. Some may argue that we need a perfect counter system, then we don't need such a limitation as the following proposed feature. But then again, even if a counter system is implemented, I think that it is more effective in team games for each player to specialize a certain unit, then help out accordingly. It has happened in other games with perfect counter systems. It's very good from teamwork point of view but in ancient times armies weren't composed of 2 types of units. Alpha 17: Sword cavalry op, spam them and down opponent's cc with a rush Alpha 18-19: Hazy for me, I myself spammed archer champions and downed buildings, easily outranging them. Alpha 20-21: Champion rush and later spam. Alpha 21: Slinger spam. Alpha 22: Cavalry skirmisher/archer spam. No cav games: skirmisher spam + melee as fodder Summary: meh Proposal: Each unit increases cost of same unit type by 0.5/1%. This stackable "aura" would make such spams not as profitable and would incite some players to search for other, yet just as efficient army compositions featuring several unit types. As a side effect, this feature makes larger batch trains even more attractive, since they are trained at the cost of next unit only, not all those after. Example: +0.5% per unit +1% per unit Why did I choose 90 units? In Alpha 22 after players banned cavalry they started spamming skirmishers, it became common to see such armies marching about. Why this kind of anti-spam mechanic? It's easy to explain this 1%, the area is drained of possible soldiers, equipment is needed etc. Overdemand, this is the word under which 0 A.D. takes a step towards a more balanced future. In this post I am not siding with nor necessarily supporting other gameplay suggestions, I feel that this isn't a big overhaul. Some will say that this isn't enough, others will resent the passing of age-old strategies. From battalions to slaves and nomads, 0 A.D. has a vast choice of future paths, each leading to something different, something unique. The team is careful, taking steps slowly - sometimes perhaps to the detriment of progress - but they are I'm sure familiar with the problem the game faces and they wish the best for it. I'm not saying that we should throw all the gameplay suggestions away, just that they all encompass several changes that drag a train of other modifications with them and the team might not want to introduce them at least for now. Implementation: Ah, the step where all the enthusiastic developers say "meh" and go watch dog memes. It could be done with each unit class having a a stackable aura, but we know that global auras are problematic - especially when they come in big stacks. I'm not familiar with code so I wont say anything else but I hope it is possible to find a way. If you are still unmotivated, please click here Last one

I see that you've changed the poll response choices to "yes" or "no". For the record, here is a screenshot of the original poll response choices. Did you change it voluntarily or because an admin forced you to? Or, both? Or, other? See, there are more than two possibilities... I'm still boycotting the poll. I understand the word "smurf" to mean someone who is lying about their skill and using an unknown account in order to disrupt balance during game formulation. I object to calling everyone on that list a "smurf".

off topic: I imagine what the Spaniards would feel with the Mapuches already in the 16th/17th century, war is much more than weapons and technologies, but also morality, knowledge of local geography and logistics.

I honestly think there can be a standardized "unique technology" scheme. Something like: Forge: 2 techs Fortress: 2 techs Civic Center: 2 techs All other structures: up to 1 tech if justified. I would also like to see Champions moved back to the Fortress and all Heroes sent to the Civic Center (with a couple exceptions, like the Persians, Athenians, and Spartans).

https://www.skyscrapercity.com/threads/where-did-japanese-come-from-the-roots-of-the-japanese.890420/page-14 https://www.iz2.or.jp/english/@#$%usyoku/@#$%usei/4.htm

Done. I contact Stan on Telegram.

I recommend that people boycott this poll until admins can take action. Different people define "smurf" differently. Is it merely a duplicate account, or is it an account engaged in misconduct such as lying about one's skill? G.O.A.T's poll question is a loaded question with a narrow range of responses. It's similar to the classic false dilemma question of, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?" If a person answers "yes" then it implies that the person was in the past beating his wife. If the person answers "no" then it implies that the person is continuing to beat his wife. There are nuances in the debate about duplicate accounts. The real problem is easy, immediate and free ability to create new reputable accounts. G.O.A.T, please put your efforts into helping solve this problem.

I'm not sure, but they consider me least or last.

An idea I've always had and that I believe many have in common is that units with swords and spears attacking stone or solid wood structures is something very strange, but I believe the time and opportunity has come to change that, I believe attacking with torches /fire are less aggressive on closer inspection. I also know that other techniques like digging holes under structures also existed.

Totally agree there

Then we can replace it with a mace or a Ge with a similar technical content and a longer handle.

If a building is entirely made of stone, it will not catch fire at all. You can refer to the data of the mirror mod I gave you earlier. Stone walls can block burning, and fortresses are extremely resistant to flames. Buildings such as fortresses or towers will not be damaged by thrown torches or flaming arrows due to the stone surface, but their interior wooden structure is not guaranteed, this is combined with a suggestion made by others before. , when you choose to delete the building, the building will not disappear directly, but will be slowly ignited from the inside. At this time, if the personnel are not evacuated in time, they will burn to death together with the building.

Basic Infantry

Yes, I mean the ge is a weapon that is similar to an axe, both long and short, and is often used to hit the head and shoulders of enemies, even if they are protected by a shield. There is a Shang Dynasty tomb in China. The owner of the tomb was a warrior, and the Tianling cover of his body was left with fragments of Ge, which proves that it is very common for such weapons to be used to attack the top of the enemy's head.

I can do the shield textures myself.

I have a version of this book with English annotations.

Who assigns these rights? and what are the tools of these moderators? Should they be accountable? Maybe we could add 1 or 2 trusted moderators. they must then be accountable for the information they consult or the accounts they ban etc.

I think if the developers and the community feel that secondary accounts should be banned. 0.AD must reconfirm it. Otherwise we remove this rule and in the profile of the players it appears the year of creation of the account. Many players who make secondary accounts do not do so out of bad intentions. A rule not understood is a rule rarely respected. It is therefore necessary to better understand what bothers you in the use of secondary accounts. We are on the internet, a digital identity means nothing. Today I'm Dakara and in 2 months I can change my nickname. Besides, is it possible or not possible to request the deletion of a 0AD account from the lobby? --- Regarding this wall I don't really see the point, yes it's quickly fun to know who is hiding behind a secondary account. It's a little gossip, so ultimately useless information. The only interest in knowing who owns a second account is if this account has very bad behavior. And in any case, the hosts are free to ban them from their game. ---- But frankly it's far from being the major concern on 0AD. The games are more and more elitist, the players disagree with each other and the ddos is always present (we even start to wonder if it's not just the game that bugs). From my first games on 0AD so 2017 I used secondary accounts and I didn't do @#$% in my games. What I think irritates people the most is the feeling of not seeing the names of known players, they are potentially on a secondary account. The lack of reference. -- Insofar as the lobby is managed by USER1, he is the manager, he applies the rules he wants as long as they are written. But is it possible to change these rules? by making them softer or harder.

P.S. I think there are 3 sources feeding GOAT's list: 1. He monitors the IP address of players in the lobby. When I forget to use a VPN, even the most obsecure of my accounts that I have used only once got found out. But when I tunneled myself to Turkiye and Netherlands, my smurf accounts were given to other players. For example Hilal and Celal are my account and not berhudar's. (but those are from long time ago) Furthermore, even the non-TG players and newer players who created second accounts were shown on the list, which enhances the suspicion, as no one would intentionally stalk every cosmic noob to look for signs of new accounts. 2. Reports using personal messages (although I doubt there are many) 3. He joins the games as spectators or players and tries to grasp who is who based on playstyle. I'm still overjoyed that he thinks I am superPOSITION. Thank you for the approval!

@G.O.A.T It's ok to keep the list since @Player of 0AD likes it. However, I would like you to put a justification or proof or even your logic for thinking that these 2 accounts are the same person. This will make your list much much more convincing and there will be a lot less angry arguments. Is my request reasonable? For example, how did you come to the conclusion that weirdjokes in phyzic? Did you monitor his IP address or did someone snitch on him? If you add a sentence of explanation after everyone then the moderators will find your list much more useful and take actions. Currently, a list without any proofs is simple a weird joke. What do you think? @Norse_Harold @Stan` @guerringuerrin @rm -rf @Dakara

Hi, there is legend, sadly in your case it is over the tabs. Do you have any mods? Which? Also what is your monitor resolution

The feature to be able to change the password, won't help such users at all, as they can't proof that the account they want to change the password for is their own account. There is a difference though between users who don't remember their password and don't have it stored in 0ad (these are the ones which can't change their password) and users who don't remember their password, but have it stored in 0ad (those ones can still log in and should also be able to change it). How would you do that? As you don't have their password you can't be logged in into their account, which is a prerequisite to changing the password. Essentially it's the same as for most websites which offer accounts: To change your password, you have to log in first. Once logged in there is somewhere a form you can use to change the password. Note that this is different from a password reset process which usually doesn't require a login, but something like a recovery email instead. That's a use case we can't cover for now.

@real_tabasco_sauce all the players get it that the balance is really hard to do , specifically the good players knew that new civ is allways hard to put good balance which happened throu 0ad previous versions . in my opinion the pro players not that disaapointed of hans balance because its acceptable but in the same time better be changed , like for example the case with ptols in a23 and the big change they got in a24

Nub post like it's writer

@real_tabasco_sauce 90% of players doing 8-9 farms for infantry while playing other civs not 10 or 50 as xpert claims. If you make 9 u will be fine with food even more than fine, ofcourse if you are not suicider. Which he often does. Anyway, nerfing whatever you thing to nerf about hans, there is nothing except nerfing overall cavs in the game. For hans to actually spam units, you require around 13 farms not 9. You also need big bag of stones for barracks, and plenty bags of metal for at leat making 1 or 2 buildings for champs. Anyone who claims crossbows or archers are op, are the players who has met a player "sniper", who simply snipe his ranged units while he focusing on meatshield. Xpert doesnt do sniping, maybe time for him to study and learn to snipe? Who knows what the future brings. Xpert (Hamdich) making more farms as he is abusing cav as often jav seems stronger too. I need to ask @Philip the Swaggerless to stop sniping xpert when he plays or me, nerfing anything else of han you will break them and no-one will use them. Last unit which is amazingly op are fanatics, due speed and capturing possibilites. Stop claiming that they cost a lot of eco, eles cost more and people do spam them. Athenians are broken too. Sword cav vs spear are doing great, any merc rank 2 cav seems amazingly op. I will give you solution to the balance as I already give one to @borg- when he did balancing of the game. Unfortunately, it will not sound nice. give back balance from a24/a25 where cavs were op, thats how u will make xpert more happy than he is now, also as borg never added u can add extra flying eles or ponies so other can have something else than just spamming cavs. I just logon to say this before you "fix" anything. @real_tabasco_sauce before releasing with xpert ideas for fixing balance please let me know, so I can start playing gauls again. Please do not send message on forums, unless you must. I do not wish to be part of the forum anymore, so I login very rarely on forums. Thanks.

As you saw from the recent incidents, "0 A.D." is not a thing. It's a project by SPI (spi-inc.org) so we are not legally allowed to hold funds. And only SPI can decide the means through which they accept donations.

Virtue= Philosophy+ Faith/Religion + Knigthood.

Fire is mostly used to kill people inside buildings or to force people out, sure it does some damage to structures as well. For me this is about immersion, on a scale 1 to 10 capture-delete is 1, sword and arrows 7 and fire depending on mechanics and more importantly how great the art is between 3 to 10. So yes, I fear fire to be possibly worse than sword and arrows, but hopeful for @Lopess for proving me wrong.

@AIEND I know you are also interested in this idea, do you have references for it?

I like having Roman swords in P1, its fluffy and also a mild eco bonus since you can tap into your starting metal and save on wood for other things like houses. That aside, there are some nice changes in A26, and for the first time since A23 I can actually start a game and feel like I can have some fun and also win. This entirely due to the reworking of fanatics, finally having something viable in P2 that can be used against the boomers is very satisfying and overall Gaul feels a very refined civilization now. P2 champions for Athens is nice, but the metal requirements hold them back. I have yet to try out Persian immortals but I like the concept. And Ardennes is still as awesome as I remember in A23

G.O.A.T now lists the claim that WilsonWilson is guerringuerrin as "under review". There is also a new note at the beginning explaining that G.O.A.T does not claim that the information is correct, and that players should do their own research. I agree, but it's not enough. Please have a higher standard of evidence for the accusations that you make. You saw how we refuted the claim that guerringuerrin is WilsonWilson. That should be part of the protocol.

just take away acceleration. it was a failure overall and it fu*ed up with game interactions like spear cav countering other cav.

For a person to be identifiable, according to the GDPR, doesn't mean that you need to be able to fetch his full name (and birthdate...) from the data you have stored. It only means that he can be distinguished from other people. "At its most basic form, whenever you differentiate one individual from others, you are identifying that individual. Any individual who can be distinguished from others is considered identifiable." (https://gdpr.eu/eu-gdpr-personal-data/) Considering the accusation being that both usernames and IP addresses are collected, we would need to consider multiple kind of identifiers: the username, the IP address, or the pair (username, IP address). From what I've read, the username is enough by itself. But let's develop a bit: What is an "online identifier" according to the GDPR? They provided in their website a non-exhaustive list containing IP addresses, cookie identifiers, RFID. (same source as above). But it is non-exhaustive, and from https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/what-is-personal-data/what-are-identifiers-and-related-factors/ we have a more detailed description: "Other examples of online identifiers that may be personal data include: MAC addresses; advertising IDs; pixel tags; account handles; and device fingerprints." And even more precise: "An individual’s social media ‘handle’ or username, which may seem anonymous or nonsensical, is still sufficient to identify them as it uniquely identifies that individual. The username is personal data if it distinguishes one individual from another regardless of whether it is possible to link the ‘online’ identity with a ‘real world’ named individual." Here the username collected are tied to account created in 0AD lobby, which fits the description. What about IP addresses? (by themselves): I have to say that the EU GDPR website is not very clear on the subject. It is true that multiple people can hide behind the same IP address. For example, it can cover an household. But even the ISP can't precisely identify one user behind an IP address, at best it identifies an household, and even that is unreliable because of potential wifi sharing, or perhaps hacking. From what I remember, that detail has proven to be important in court, invalidating some proofs featuring IP addresses. But then, why again was the IP labeled as "online identifier"? Maybe because it does discriminate users most of the time even if not 100%? Maybe because they wanted to voluntarily leave some doubt to make it easier on the court, for them or for service providers. On another note, WFG had to get GDPR compliant, and they don't collect more meaningful identifiers than usernames or IP address (ask @elexishow much effort he put into the GDPR compliance). Some more info in https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/UserDataProtection That said, this doesn't mean GDPR can be applied in this situation, maybe this part (from my first source) can be debatable: "Furthermore, the GDPR only applies to personal data processed in one of two ways: Personal data processed wholly or partly by automated means (or, information in electronic form); and Personal data processed in a non-automated manner which forms part of, or is intended to form part of, a ‘filing system’ (or, written records in a manual filing system)."

gl, hf! Will you be cosplaying again at the booth?

Probably mockup from 2013

So I have little to no technical or artistic experience but I know a lot about Ancient Near Eastern Civilizations and I was thinking that having the Nabataeans or their predecessors the Lihyanites included in gameplay would be kind of neat... They were a major trading power between the Eastern Empires of Assyria, babylonia, Persia, Phoenicia, and Egypt and the Western Empires such as Macedonia and even Rome. Their major cities were Petra (the most famous) and Mada'in Saleh, but also had outposts all over present day Israel, Jordan, Palestine, and Northern Saudi Arabia/the Hejaz. There is a great exhibit on them and other Arabian trade kingdoms at the Sackler Gallery in Washington DC if anyone is interested. Here are some photos of Nabataean architechture: Tombs at Madain Saleh (Below) A Temple at Petra (above) A building in a minor Nabataean city The one below is in a series of photos of Petra http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulmannix/3482513029/

Here's the link to a Design Document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1O8k1ITAxdMXz0xENZl69B5RTmfSlCHsHhKFkgY7xcho/edit I'll be working on it, if anyone has ideas or building references feel free to share them!