Leaderboard

@Player of 0AD

Hey folks, I tried around with the palisade and had the idea to make every trunk a single prop, which adapts to the height of the terrain, so that it has a nicer look on hilly terrains and the towers inbetween are (almost) obsolete. Let me know what you think of it palisades.mp4 It works good, some problems are left though. The tower is a single stick now, which doesn't make much sense. Sometimes the "stretching" leaves too much space in between or produces overlapping. I think those things could be solved by editing simulation/helpers/wall.js, but unfortunately I don't know javascript, maybe somebody would like to dig into it. I'd like to add more faction-specific lower walls, if that works. It wouldn't work with stone walls though

I like that idea.

Not at all.

Side note, why do people think turtling is good? If someone has a bunch of towers and forts, just go around it, attack elsewhere, or force them to move to your army. At the worst, it's just a very annoying strategy.

I hate it

Btw Helicity, be careful with those tools you share here.

It would probably a bit. You could replace them by 3d boxes or decals on the ground.

I recommend that you install all 4 of these at the same time. But you can choose to install just one of them to suit your needs. Shavedtrees deals with the colours of trees and fauna AbstractGUI changes the interface layout and makes adjustments to projectile colour and various details Bettersound makes alarms and attacks louder Darkland makes the ground dark instead of green. Basically dark mode for eye protection, especially in arctic map. These mods only change the appearance of the game; they do not instantly make you a better player nor do they automate anything at all. However, they do allow you to focus more on your own micro, optimisation and game events instead of being distracted by extravagant eyecandy features. shaved_trees.zip darkland.zip abstractGUI.zip betterSound.zip

Thanks Stan I got the SVN to run by using the -writableRoot command, the -conf:rendererbackend:gl command did not work. Within the SVN I downloaded the vulcan shader mod and was able to run with that as well. (I also got some new insight into running from the command line from an internet search which showed me the trick of dragging the "binary" folder icon in explorer, where pyrogenesis.exe is located, to the command line which when pasted after the cd command adds the full correct syntax to the line saving a lot of typing.) All in all a fruitful exercise.

Yup.

This is funny. The idea would create more problems than gameplay features. Most people would be against it even by principle (buildings are supposed to protect those inside). Probably would be a little difficult to implement. It doesn't really fit with the level of detail of other gameplay mechanics. (the idea has too much detail, then to add an upgrade to affect something so peculiar doesnt make sense). All in all, the juice is not worth the squeeze. (and the juice tastes bad)

Well the whole point of getting towers is that you gain a measure of defense without any population cost. I think it is important that towers, CCs and forts have default arrows so that they are important for map control. I made a patch and a community mod branch to make buildings not target randomly. What this would do is make buildings better against smaller raiding groups, and actually kill units among a large army instead of damaging them all slightly. Balance would follow of course, for example, IDK why a CC has almost as much firepower as a fort. I think forts should have more default arrows than CCs. As for ships,@wowgetoffyourcellphone is/will be working on a ship rework to make them proper units instead of using buildingAI, which I think will be a huge improvement for ships (among other things like scaling them down some). For towers, another option for decreased effectiveness with pierce armor would be to decrease their damage a little and make them ignore armor. haha never mind thats a terrible idea. I'd say just keep the damage models the same tbh, or replace the increased arrow count upgrade for increased damage upgrade (available in city?)

initial arrows can stay as they are. I was thinking about a tech for enhancing attack damage, but also it would make sense to just have buildings also be affected by forge ranged damage techs.

make it into a tech

@rossenburgi have removed the list tool; I published it just to draw attention from the important people and now they have made a solution so the tool is no longer necessary

i dont support making this public ngl @Helicity, making a tool to extract ip addresses ( the same problem we are trying to avoid ) is somehow wrong. It's like saying "hey, i don't support it but here is the key to it guys, go ahead and extract peoples ip). I get the point and all the awareness you are making and fortunately it seems a ticket has been open for it and hopefully we see a fix in future updates. Keep up the good work , the only thing i disagree here is sharing that script which somehow seem like giving bad actors the very tool they could use to cause problems ( which can be fairly avoided by not sharing it at all ). And to be honest, not everyone knew or knows about the ip addresses and other info in the mainlog. We clearly needs to expect some increase in ddos attacks soon, it has been drastically reduced for the past 2 months and started emerging again as far as i've observed - yesterday

I like this idea. But towers are sometimes ineffective in late game, so a few adjustments: The player can command the tower where to shoot; they can choose to focus fire at one enemy unit or just spread out its attack. The arrow damage from towers increases for town phase and city phase. This is because in late game, both players would have bigger armies and more military techs. So what had been a lethal damage in Village phase is insignificant in City Phase. 10 pierce in village phase is a lot, because in comparison, infantry archers do only 6-7 and no one has upgraded armour. However, in city phase, something with 10 pierce is just weak because even an upgraded archer is 11-13; slingers 18 and skirmishers 26. Everyone also has upgraded armour. So in City phase, the towers should to at least 16 damage per shot to be significant at all. The justification: the archer inside is now better trained and has better equipment. But to prevent turtling, the first unit inside give the tower 2 arrows per second, then the later ones add one each until a maximum of 5 arrows per tower. So if the player wants to turtle, they have to garrison more units inside towers - their land army is weak so now they are susceptible to siege attacks.

You guys are breaking the game completely... and of course, you are breaking the community and the privacy of the players. If someone is mad at this and reports it to the judges, a lot of fun things will start to happen... You all should stop this and start enjoying the game again, like we all did before.

For siege towers its already the case For ships it might be not optimal, because you would always need to garrison them, so its more micro-management For buildings it would mean more micro-management too, but it could make sense because it makes turtling weaker

@Yekaterina @Stan` can we make a mod in which we change every 3d model to sprites, do you think it will help people with low end PCs to play the game without much lag, I am aware that managing what each unit can do and calculations contribute to lag as stan said in one of his comments, but still will converting 3d models to sprites make any difference? I am only asking this as a mod so that low end pcs can run game as fast as others I want 0AD to be in 3d as always.

Close to RC. Launch, depends on whether it works or not ^^

fyi #6794

@zxphxr you may like these @leopard @MarcusAureliu#s @Helicity the bugs have been fixed.

Now there are a bunch of AI services. Why don't developers generate voice acting? https://youtu.be/dVVZaZ8yO6o

Hey everyone, Thank you for taking the time to vote! I have decided to go with Agni, as Vulcan really felt bland and I think 0 A.D. deserves better. It also starts with an A, which is a lucky coincidence, but I don't want it to be binding, so we'll see what will happen for the next alpha.

Feels like a false choice. If the features are actually good then they should be in EA. To be honest, I don't see a need for a "sequel" when everything worthwhile can just be integrated into EA (yeah, I know the timeframe restriction exists for EA, but that is false construction that doesn't need to exist).

Only the champion archers can poison. They are the toxic women. Try to stay at least 70 meter away from them.

When feature is available to EVERYONE it is not cheating but it is game feature. Use your words wisely. Also any new features usually comes from smart people. It is kind of automation (easing manual repetive tasks) and focus more on strategy. Usually this is how game should evolve. It cannot be considered as cheating. Cheating is what gives you advantage and you don't have access to it. - Game modification which are not publicly available and not possible to integrate to future 0ad version to enhance game play - Modification of game stats - Physical hw cheatings / different HW (faster, better mouse, mechanical keyboard...) these nobody considers, but gives huge advantage in response times. Auto-aim, multiclicks... etc..

guys its off topic, and there are times when and when not to feed/help a rushed ally, and player skill is taken into that valuation unoffensively. simple as that. The main topic at hand is way more concerning. It is about the design scope of 0ad. I have noticed @Atrik's mod in-game and find it very interesting. In other games they consider such features as autoqueue, % management, and especially quick-start to be "macros" that automate smaller aspects of the game. In some games it is allowed and in others they are not, but it is important for us to decide on a boundary for them in 0ad. In Aoe2 there have been macros that allow for rapid sequential placement of farms and 1-to-1 villager assignment with 1 click and drag, and this is a cheat. I am confident that someone could design a feature that automatically executes the "sniping" micromanagement technique that we have been using in the current meta, and this would be disastrous.

I do share. It may not be as much as you want or at the exact time that you want it, but I do. As a general principle, my eco balance in late game is very different from other players because I stockpile res and then try to overwhealm enemies with greater numbers. That often makes me look like I am floating way more res than I actually am. Because of this, it is not uncommon for me to go from 2-3K in res down to 0 in a very, very short period of time. Likewise, I often do not feed "worse" players during boom because it allows an enemy to rush a "worse" player but have the effect of rushing a "better" player. It often isn't as simple as it seems, and just because you ask doesn't mean I can

Just combine two games into one. Empires Ascendant and Empires Besieged will now be selectable "game modes", which should be renamed "500 B.C. to 1 A.D." and "1 A.D. to 500 A.D." And what's with the "phases"? The phases will change as before within their "modes". As for a complete overhaul of the game, then why did the developers split it into two parts at all, instead of putting all of antiquity into one? You had a great example of the first Age of Empires where all the ancient nations were together. Now you will have to make a second game, which will be almost indistinguishable from the first. In my opinion, this is a useless job, unless of course you make a game on Unreal Engine and with compatibility with proprietary stores. It is possible to bring all of Late Antiquity into Empires Ascedant as upgrades and add an option to "lock" development until Late Antiquity, so Republican Rome would just have an "imperial phase" and all you need to do is add a couple of imperial units and change the design several buildings. Write a new "vision". And the site needs to be updated since 2018.

that's redoing the game again. 0 ad is focused in phases. In the development of a city or a province than in the evolution of an empire.

I would like to ask the developers to weaken the elite units, as they are almost invulnerable and make building attacks useless.