Leaderboard

If we issue a command to a unit before its voice line ends, the voice line will be repeated, overlapping the previous one. In my humble opinion, this is a serious audio problem as double clicks and immediate changes in decision-making are usual. The following might be a good strategy to solve it: Add a timer for every unit which is set when the unit uses a voice line. As long as the timer is not reset, the unit is silent. Upon reset, the unit has a chance of using a voice line. You get the point.

Or, alternatively, we let the American civs get the champion skirmisher and champion slinger since they used these very frequently in battles.

No by passability classes.

We should make battering rams able to go through allied units more easily. Often, a large group of allied archers are spread out over the entire territory and rams are blocked, unable to reach any important buildings. Furthermore, rams are often involved in melee battles, just twisting itself in the middle a huge firefight. This makes pathfinding more difficult for everyone and the game will lag, therefore I think rams should be able to pass dense crowds of human units more easily but not through buildings or palisades. The same applies for elephants. In real life, the archers would move themselves a bit to let their friend's ram to pass through, and the ram would always head towards some enemy structures instead of trying to involve itself in a melee confrontation. Elephants would definitely step on human units instead of politely going around them. So I am suggesting that we add a feature which lets large objects pass through allied units but not structures or enemy lines. On top of that, cavalry units often get stuck at a building site, unable to move out. Therefore I think we should add a mechanism which allows units to push others away if necessary.

I think it’s been a problem for awhile. Part of the problem is also turn rates. We tried to change turn rates for community mod, but I think it was voted down

They used to have but we’re removed from a23–>a24. I think another civ (Persia?) also used to have a champ skirm too that was removed at the same time. But yes, I would like a champ skirm inf unit in the game again

There is another option - to make two borders for "sticking" buildings: one border - back to back, the other - at a distance of "one tower". Then the tiles for the indent will not be needed. Or make a switch for a visible "grid of coordinates", where each cell could be in area like a tower, where it will be possible to place buildings, "sticking" to the squares on the grid.

This might be usefull to you for boosting CPU https://github.com/nbebaw/boostchanger or https://github.com/FeralInteractive/gamemode In the past I had issue with WIFI, either buy external USB wifi with antenna or use hardwired cable. Those are most likely issues

Those two would be like the Antigonids or mid-late Macedonians with agema/royal peltasts or kestrosphedones (dart slingers), respectively. Most of the units on the list would fit this faction.

We do know more about East Han than west Han so it's probably easier to implement. Both are around 0 AD, but west Han started in around 200BC and East Han ended in around 300AD Sad, it was a glorious empire Not sure about mercenary uses in Han dynasty but we can definitely go from a javelin unit.

This wasn't a very big problem back in A25, probably since we disabled unit overlapping, the rams can't squeeze through infantry anymore. So the solution is to decrease the effective size of rams or add a repulsion field for rams that automatically scatters nearby infantry, like a proton flying into a cloud of positrons.

It's not unfortunately, i only have position randomnization for skirmish maps.

My thoughts on that old discussion are that the meat shield phenomena is mainly because of the high armor, low damage disposition of melee units. It is better to fix it outright than try and introduce a mechanic to work around it. I think it can still be done and could be a nice mechanic, but it wouldn't help with the above.

No but you can use the somewhat updated doc on https://docs.wildfiregames.com/javascript/gui/ It would be nice indeed, but that's very low priority, if it's even possible.

Unfortunately no, as far as I know. It would be great to have an "Inspect" functionality, like the one present on most browsers. Maybe it is worth to considered it as a long-term addition to the game. This would make the game more attractive to modders and facilitate the development of mods/features/patches. @Stan` what do you think?

sounds like: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1971

I am more inclined towards to the latter as I have never experienced network problems doing anything else: downloading large files, browsing web pages, chats, watching YouTube and uploading content were all smooth. Below are some test results:

Plutarch also linked the worsening of the piracy problem to war and did so in more specific terms. The Third Mithridatic War (73–63 bce) against king Mithridates VI of Pontus (in modern northern Turkey) played a part in giving the pirates boldness because piracy lent itself to Mithridates’ service. This suggested that Mithridates fostered piracy as a means to weaken the Romans. Plutarch also thought that with the civil wars in Rome the Romans left the sea unguarded, which gave the pirates the confidence to lay waste islands and coastal cities in addition to attacking ships at sea. Piracy spread from its original base in Cilicia (on the southern coast of modern Turkey). The pirates also seized and ransomed some towns. Men of distinction also got involved in piracy. Plutarch claimed that pirates had more than 1,000 ships, that they captured 400 towns and plundered temples in Greece and sacred and inviolable sanctuaries, listing fourteen of them. He cited the praetors Sextilius and Bellinus and the daughter of Antonius among the important Romans who were seized for a ransom. The pirates also mocked their captives if they were Romans. Piracy spread over the whole of the Mediterranean, making it unnavigable and closed to trade. This caused scarcity of provisions. Appian attributed the escalation of piracy to Mithridates plundering the Roman province of Asia extensively in 88 bce and the rest of the First Mithridatic War (89–85 bce). The destitute people who lost their livelihood became pirates. At first, they scoured the sea with a few small boats. As the war dragged on they became more numerous and used larger ships. When the war ended piracy continued. They sailed in squadrons. They besieged towns or took them by storm and plundered them. They kidnapped rich people for a ransom. The ragged part of the Cilician coast became their main area for anchorage and encampment and the Crags of Cilicia (the promontory of Coracesium) became their main base. It also attracted men from Pamphylia, Pontus, Cyprus, Syria and elsewhere in the east. There were quickly tens of thousands of pirates and they dominated the whole Mediterranean. They defeated some Roman naval commanders, even off the coast of Sicily. The sea became unsafe. This disrupted trade and some lands remained untilled, leading to food shortages and hunger in Rome. Eliminating such a scattered and large force from no particular country and of an intangible and lawless nature seemed a difficult task.

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.

We made it to the top 100!

Finally it's our hobby and interest that brings us here. We have other open source projects for these fighting effects. No need to duplicate work already done. And Hyrule has quite some great effects, too. But I understand your point, you wish new generation. IMO 50 year old also is fine. Roman Senate was rather elderly too. Aragorn Arathorn's son also haha. And Elves ... oh dear hundreds of years old. Who cares about age

Only because you are older than them, still are a youngster yourself as we all are. There is no such thing as old. President of united states is 80. A friend of mine is 95 and still paints his house every year (hence gets more done than half of the population; at least I don't repaint it every year haha). Who cares about Indie. They only earn money by us being on their site. Money has won - again. As Apple's 60 billion quarterly profit shows.

Can it? Yes: There are plenty of other ancient warfare themed RTS games where melee units are a viable DPS source. There is nothing particularly exotic about 0 AD's pathfinding, or combat model, or unit conventions that would seem to prevent it reaching a similar balance point. Will it? Maybe: For the entire time I have been watching this project develop (which is going on 5 or 6 years now) its design has never strayed from one rigid network of established unit roles and interactions. In order to introduce melee that is useful as more than just a meat shield, without simultaneously rendering ranged units entirely redundant, the developers are going to have to throw out that established counter network and replace it with something new. If the wider community rebels the moment such a thing is even suggested then it will never happen. Should it? Yes: For the sake of both historical authenticity and playstyle diversity, it really must. As the game currently exists, it is the ranged units that make up the survivable core of any infantry attack force. Melee infantry act as an expendable auxiliary contingent that exists to boost the combat efficiency of the core until it is killed off. I don't want to go too far and say that no ancient militaries worked this way, but it is certainly not how the ancient Greeks, Romans, Carthaginians, or Macedonian successor states operated. For them it was the (mostly but not always entirely melee) heavy infantry that made up the survivable core of their armies. Light, usually ranged infantry were the ones deployed as the expendable support auxiliaries, and together with cavalry they usually represented only a small faction of an army's total fighting numbers. The status quo is a huge misrepresentation of these cultures' normal tactics. Additionally, such tight synergy between ranged and melee is very limiting to a player's creativity and to the operational diversity of different civilizations the game can feature. The game may have civs that claim to specialize in heavy infantry, but they are still locked into the same composition as any other civ. No one is going to boom into melee infantry only, or skip basic ranged infantry upgrades in favor of more melee upgrades, and the game is poorer for not having these options. This is not to say either that the meat shield meta should be removed entirely. It would be interesting if there were actually a few civs where ranged still forms the survivable core of the army, but for the majority not permitting melee heavy infantry to stand on their own is limiting and profoundly anachronistic.

we can have both.