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.

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/

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.

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.

This is nice, but you have to make the portraits either 128x128 pixels or 256x256.

Or you could have the stats mirror the other damage stats. We could also have a gamemode (like the deathmatch mode) that resets the stats to a certain value so that it's one in SP and a various value in MP.

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.

This weapon, we call it 戈Ge.

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

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.

anti infantry infantry sword is good choice. I prefer spear-lancer as anti cavalry cavalry.not bad either.

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 the difference, I like sword phase 1

Spear infantry are a poor counter to jav cav. Better to boost the spear cav in some way, a unit which is intended to counter jav cav.

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)."

A very good idea lol, I already lost some time trying to play on the map of Greece. with some modifications.

Probably mockup from 2013

Someone was talking about making walls snap to cliffs. If you are doing a mod, maybe that logic could be repurposed for snapping other buildings to cliffs.

For a special building you could include a cliff, however you could use the Nabataean cliff architecture as a basis for free-standing structures, like we've used references from Mauryan caves. As you say, it would be awkward to build a desert cliff on other biomes, so in my opinion the Nabataean structures should be free-standing, like the Great Temple. http://youtu.be/1ZUpA24kxrY

Hmm. Looks interesting. How do you intend to handle the buildings in cliffs? I thought they were unique structures like in Petra, but your photos suggest to me that Ancient Arabs build their cities inside cliffs on a regular basis. Which is awesome, but kind of hard to portray in terms of gameplay. What would be their civ traits? Something about trade for the first one and maybe a bonus on desert terrain for the second one?

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!