Leaderboard

Pictish symbols

More often than not, refining the enhancements to different units means enhancing skills rather than weapons, and these technologies should be dispersed in the buildings where these units are trained, rather than in the blacksmith.

Visible garrison is quite the joke without scaling, battlements on walls look like shin guards. Now I imagine an archer roughly the height of ship body in a crow's nest. I doubt making ships anything else than simple units which work mostly like land units will ever lead to something playable.

Generally speaking, it would be nice to standardize some things, like: 1 civ-specific blacksmith tech for each civ. 1 civ-specific tech for each civ at the Civic Center. 1 at the Temple. 2 at the Fortress or Champion Building. And then 1-2 wild card techs for each civ placed in any building (I can imagine 1 or 2 special techs placed in the Dock for the Athenians and the Shipyard for the Carthaginians, for example). I wouldn't count any of the new unit-specific techs in this thread as civ-specific, since they are given to all civs with those classes of units. They are class-specific, not civ-specific.

the best RTS free (without being Freemium).

After taking a long break from RTS games I returned to a game from my childhood - American Conquest - and it reminded me of this specific topic because I think that the way battalions work there would make this game possible to implement them at the full capacity Battalions in that game are made from singular units and can be created with proper special units and disbanded at will or after the battalion looses too many troops - in that game battalions help buffing units and lower the fear of encountering cav/overwhelming enemy force in the fights (fear can actually cause units to flee for their lives and be uncontrollable for a short time) - so battalions serve a double purpose: 1. They boost morale for the troops they are made from so they fight in sync and don't flee from the fight 2. They help ease the micro intensity (and also make the game look smoother/easier to manage when fighting on more than one front) Also - adding battalions might also make sense if you view the development of your civilization over time and would add a leverage to a town/city phase rush if it's implemented as a later phase thing - in the first phase when you don't have much you still build one by one but later on when you get bigger you get options to organize your troops (adding battalions as a tech in a building to research at a city phase for example) As stated earlier BFME2 has awesome battalion system but on the other hand I see more potential for American-Conquest-style of battalions in Delenda Est (possibly even in base 0ad game) since making fixed battalions would negate a lot of potential singular units provide (not just gathering aspect that was changed in Delenda Est but scouting and building multiple buildings at once as well - sending 20 troop battalion to scout could be a huge blunder if the area is dangerous/occupied already)

Don't worry about credit

This is a great direction to take naval combat.

Thanks for the help I cut it down from 12k to 7.4k tris. I imported the Columns from the roman Civic Center and used them for the Pronaos (the temple part). They look better now, but still have 2.8k tris only for the 16 columns, probably still to much considering they are much smaller. I could try to further decrease the number of tris or to do a texture rework if needed. Just need to know what I'm aiming for so let me know, I'm open to any kind of feedback I'll attach the files incl. blender files again. Btw, why are imported models often scaled so small and how can I see the seams of them? Also is there a way to unwrap uv-islands on top of each other? Pantheon2.zip

Wildfire Games would like to thank to all the members of this awesome community and thank you for the continued support and patience. To continue spreading the word about 0 A.D. we designed this best wishes card, you can find the XCF template at the bottom for printing. zeroad-best-wishes_03.zip

Is it possible to make the design of rams more Chinese? Those amphoras on the shields are a bit confusing.

https://code.blender.org/2023/02/new-blender-development-infrastructure/ @Stan`

@Stan` wtf?

Indeed, for example, to strengthen the technology of swordsmen and archers, you only need to give civilizations with corresponding units.

Hello everyone, I finally figured out how to fix this and i think it's a bug from Ubuntu because it's not only 0ad but goes same in other app too if you goes full screen. Here the solution that works for me : https://askubuntu.com/questions/1433146/cursor-disappears-when-i-fullscreen-an-app-on-ubuntu-22-04 (and this method doesn't require to configure options in ~/.config/0ad/config/user.cfg)

A senile incompetent.

the best post of the year. We must give more depth to the gameplay. Nobody plays water maps.

I tried this version on mac with moltenVK. Nothing seemed out of the ordinary until I turned texture texture quality to high. At hight texture quality, it does something like this: (the video is from an earlier test I did) ultra_high_shadows.mp4 After lowering textures back to medium/low, the glitched textures remain. There is screen tearing when panning while using default settings. Someone told me it's not possible, but turning on vsync fixes them perfectly and results in very smooth panning. I would say vulcan gives me an average of 10 to 15 more fps, which is impactful, but more importantly I do not get stutters or frame rate drops that I noticed frequently before.

What you call dumbed down, I call consistent.

For what it's worth, it was very easy for me to get the game built and running on the v141 toolset in VS2017 (which references the Windows 8.1 SDK), with defines to support Windows 7. The binary dependencies in SVN don't even need to be recompiled, I just had to remove two XP-toolset-related workarounds. v141-toolset.patch

I like ships as they are now, I like naval maps and play regularly. It is true that ships require quite some micro managing, but I think that is what I like about ships, it is not just spamming units like we often see in mainland games. From my point of view: What I like now: Cannot spam ships onto the enemy, because expensive and micro managing. Garrisoned units make them stronger. Without garrisoned units they are useless. Garrison catapults and they throw rocks. All ships can transport units. What I don't like now: They are "stupid", i.e. they get stuck too easily when navigating. (This improved wrt previous versions I have to say.) They overlap multiple on the same spot (I think this happens also with siege engines). For the ships this is often too much. Formations don't apply to ships. You have to take care that they arrive together. What I would like to have/change: Easier to fix: Maybe to add some button, like it was done with drop resources, that when you press it the ship automatically goes to some shore (that you may specify with e.g. a rally point or a right click), it unloads the units, they fix the ship, they garrison back in it and the ship returns to the combat position. This would greatly reduce the micromanaging still without allowing to spam ships. As with the catapults, if you garrison bolt shooters the ship shoots these stronger arrows. Allow to focus the attack on some specific unit. If the enemy has a war ship and 10 fishing boats, I want to be able to focus all my arrows on the war ship and not waste fire power on the fishing. When a ship is attacked, damage not only the ship but also the crew (and they gradually die). In that way it is not possible to have an immortal ship that you fix hundreds of times with the same crew.

I think that if every civs get at least the arrow ship and the boarding ship it could work. From this they could defend themselves. Ramming and artillery would be unique to naval civs.

Oh you're working with elexis on this? Good job

Yo tambien llevo bastante tiempo jugando 0ad, y me gusta muchísimo, siento que tiene demasiado potencial, es un juego muy ambicioso, que si se consolida más oficialmente, puede llegar a la medida de juegos como: simcity, age of empires, o incluso assassins creed y aunque solo uno de los que mencioné, cumple con el funcionamiento y objetivo que lleva 0ad, los demás también tienen muchisimo peso, en lo urbanistico, e historico, por eso los menciono. Yo me desempeño más en el área de la ilustracion, todavia soy estudiante, pero conozco un poco sobre las artes visuales, de verdad me gustaría entrar, no puedo prometer que me puedo dedicar a esto a fondo, pero si haria mi esfuerzo para dar lo mejor de mi, ademas, tengo algunos trabajos, o mejor dicho, bocetos que he hecho, y tal vez podrian interesarles, soy excelente trabajando en equipo, y me gusta aprender de los que tienen mas experiencia que yo :3

I agree this is pretty annoying. Perhaps something for A28 community mod.

I miss the war dogs with chainmail ^^"

If the vid is unavailable (after 4.5 years), how do you think @Lion.Kanzen will be able to help?

Intentional (by design of the session UI, not the Structure Tree), and dates back to this Revision. Easily changed by altering this line of code. Note the same thing occurs in the game setup screen (also by design, and also that Revision, but behaviour defined in a different file).

I was just wondering if the AIs coordinate attacks or if they just happen to show up at the same time. Since it's usually the members of a team I suspect they are coordinating. In which case: nice work from the programmers. Although not necessarily nice to be on the receiving end...

When a ship is destroyed that had units garrisoned inside, these units disappear form the game (they've presumably died in the shipwreck) but they are not included in the lost unit counter in the stats. Is this intentional? Screenshot from the stats of my playing Corsica and Sardinia for the first time in a while. You can see that the total of units lost from red and yellow are lower than the number of trained units. Disclaimer: new to the forum (not new to the game, started playing in 2018). If this is not the right place for this kind of post, lmk. I sifted through the FAQ as well as this thread, and did a quick reddit search on r/0ad and did not see anything recent about this topic, but I'd be surprised if I was the first to bring it up. Game version: Alpha26

Nice, did you make this ? It would be fun to be able to update the wall gates of the persians to this ^^

Thank you for creating the best RTS. Merry Christmas to all at Wildfire Games and forum members. Wishing you all the best for 2023.

I would like to suggest, as an enhancement, that units gain experience in a fortress. Additionally, that fortress have an enhanced experience benefit, such as 2X what is obtained in the barracks.

We made it to the top 100!

i completely agree, recently bought AOE4 for $45 or so and instantly regretted. It's just too realistics doesn't feel more like an rpg. I bet 0ad is way better as compared to AOE4 from my POV. Faster and competitive games, requires smart approaches and fast thinking to overcome opponents, that's what RPG is all about. In AOE you cant use a scout to gather food, women can take forever to gather etc. The only best thing about AOE4 is their graphics. If we are to compare 0ad with AOE4 headon, i definitely would say 0ad stands out. About time people should get to know 0AD #0adtotheworld

is 0ad not 3D? Honestly, I think 0ad has a massive edge graphically even over AOE4 with its massive budget. AOE 4 looks goofy and cartoonish, and apparently it only runs fast on the lowest settings so it looks even worse in that configuration. I think one way to make 0ad more "modernized" would be to improve accessibility. It seems to me that players these days often just want to jump right into a playlist with matchmaking as soon as they are set up with an account and knowledge from the tutorial/tech tree. In other words, it might be a bit of a turn-off to join the lobby and have to pick a 1v1 or host their own game. Within the lobby, I can envision a "Ranked" quickplay button which will queue you up for a 1v1 with an opponent determined by matchmaking. I'd say this would improve accessibility and the competitive interest of the game. These ranked games would have a standardized set of random maps (maybe feldmap incorporated into main game), a particular map size, population cap, and starting res.

About archers targeting other ranged units, I'd like them to normally target the nearest unit, but when you tell them to attack a unit, they should go on to attack other units near that one after they kill it. Meat shield infantry and range dps should continue to be major roles, but I'd like more diversity among units, so there would be more other roles, different ones specialized in different ways. Pikemen could be a more specialized melee fighter, weaker in pierce armor, swordmen stronger in pierce armor than melee, a range unit or two should be more armored instead of only differing in attack and range; the elephant archer of course, but I think the skirmisher (peltast) should be too. There should be a couple melee units that have high attack and less armor, like the axe and mace men Kush has, and a cavalry.

It also appears in EB. It is based on a migration period Scandinavian pendant, so maybe not the best choice https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/473485 On another thread Genava posted some ideas for a sun wheel symbol

I think both "exploits" are fine. Building a CC in enemy territory comes with risks, costs and missed opportunities. Building an CC takes time that could be spent for other purposes. Building wooden towers and upgrading them isnt problematic either IMHO.

BASED. LMAO

It would require a complete rewrite of the game engine for each of these devices since they are both java based.