Leaderboard

0 A.D. currently updates the simulation state every 200ms. This update usually takes 20-40ms, depending on the number of units doing things. This means even if you're running at 60 FPS graphically, when the sim is running, you'll get worse FPS, and worst you might get a lot of 'micro-freezes'. Furthermore, the 200 ms turn length gives high input lag which would be nice to shorten. I ran some quick experiments on Combat Demo Huge to see what changing the turn length would do to performance, and the results are somewhat more promising than I expected. First, what to expect: We should run fewer JS timers each simulation turn, as they will tend to hit on different frames. This should 'smooth' the framerate. Movement might be a little easier and smoother since we're going less far away (in practice, I'd need to update Pushing, it's too smooth) Things like 'range queries' shouldn't change too much, as we still run all of them every turn. Overall the FPS should be lower, as we compute more things, but also smoother, as we don't stop as long. Frames would go "16-16-30-16-16-30ms..." instead of "16-16-16-16-80-16-16-16-16-80ms..." The results are quite interesting. The 'smoothing' effect is rather convincing. I think if we adapted to not run all Range queries on all turns, and perhaps tweaked movement appropriately, it might be worth looking into running turns every 100ms for example. In the profiling runs below, Red is 350ms turns, green is 200ms (normal), dark-blue is 100ms and cyan is 50ms turns. Remember that the red curve is farther ahead in time at any given time.

https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1971 ^for attack ground

@NitroVicky IIRC it's a given technical thing. The AI knows everything going on, I consider it cheating; it knows where your buildings are if it wants to attack and it can build in unexplored terrain. Maybe you can implement blinds for the AI?

I fixed one then realised the filename was lava_test_0x.dds and none of one actually tiles. Ideally we'd need new ones. Here is the one I made for posterity. In gimp layer > transform > offset (shift + ctrl + o) by half, then use the clone tool to patch things up, and offset again.

Interesting developments! There has been work by @real_tabasco_sauce to give melee units more combat value which would go a long way to make sniping a secondary form of micro, with actual movement, formations, and positioning being more important. Sniping, automatic or not, is not a great place for the game to be. During fall of 2021, the meta was all about melee units (mainly pikemen) allowing ranged units to be invincible. Around that time I learned how to snipe using option/alt after watching berhudar spread women out on his berries and since then I have been teaching players to snipe who are frustrated/want to learn how. I figured if everyone knew about it it would be fair, but its just not good to have such a powerful micro technique not be obvious to newer players, 0ad in multiplayer right now is basically divided by those who snipe and those who don't. I suppose we just have to all vote for @real_tabasco_sauce's melee rework when its on the ballot

it was hidden in the middle, in a period (punctuation)

From Argentina. Most specifically Entre Ríos

IIRC local.cfg is for development to override values from default.cfg. Did the renderer.backend.vulkan.disabledescriptorindexing = "true" line change something? Thanks! I'll include some changes into the next RC, will see then.

there still will be fun in finding new tactics and micro techniques, just not this one.

There would still be significant overkill, especially with archers, because at any time there are only a handful of the "most forward" enemy units. Might be an especially large overkill with archers because all the archers stand in roughly the same spot so they would all have similar or the same "closest" units. Perfect sniping wouldn't be 1 unit attacking 1 unit, but maybe 5 attacking 1, depending on the average turns to kill. It is better to kill 50% of the enemy army while leaving the rest untouched, than to damage the whole enemy army by 50%. So you do want to focus on a subset of units, while not focusing so much that overkill is excessive.

Ok... I guess I'll accept that a re-balancing would kinda make disappear the justifications for a stance to be able to attack ranged units. Sounds reasonable.

I just think that level of control of your units should not be automated. I agree that whoever has the faster clicks should not always win a fight and that sniping is not a desirable meta, as @BreakfastBurrito_007 pointed out, but can we let the-fine tuned control of units remain a learnable skill? there is fun in trying to find the lowest HP cav that rushed your early eco and being able to kill it as they retreat. Also there is fun in sniping if you know it will be effective because you have learned when it is effective. Adding a stance to do automatic sniping will add a level of automation that doesn't fit with the behavior of other stances, or any other configurable behavior in the game. Also, when the sniping meta is fixed, automatic sniping will probably just mislead new players into thinking ranged targets should be prioritized, when in reality it depends on many more factors. perhaps you would take interest in attack ground? I would find this to be a much more generally applicable attack mode. Its got a few nuances in terms of implementation, like how to smoothly choose the radius while selecting the area to attack, and whether or not the attack should be one volley or endless attacks.

That's only part of what sniping does. The other part is that you distribute your fire over a big portion of the enemy army, instead of wasting tons of damage on overkill of one unit at a time.

11. in maps with long and complex unpassable obstacles, the AI starts acting weirdly, only considering euclidean distance for espansions and attacks. I think this is the kind of things you may want the easy AI to do anyway. if it acts dumb it makes you feel smarter. there have been some work on better AI in the past, which was never merged into the main game, @Yekaterina knows more. Catilina was pretty good I remember.

I hate when my units do that. And I exploit it with enemy units.

10. Gathering resources under enemy tower.

9. Inefficient resource gathering Just yesterday I saw some women gather stone real far out; no storehouse close, stating minerals hardly touched and not utilized.

The AI, PetraBot, certainly can be improved. It often uses bad strategies and is weak; I consistently beat 7 AIs all teamed up against me. So I am trying to improve the AI behaviour by tweaking its code and I would appreciate any inputs / suggestions. Firstly, I will identify a list of imperfections with the current AI: Suicidal early attacks - sends some units to attack you but then suicide all of them at your civic centre. It doesn't know how to retreat. The long march also delays their development by a huge amount. Wasting resources on non-essential buildings and techs: Greek theatres, towers, wonders (even though it's far from reaching the limit population and needs to spend resources elsewhere) Wasting time on capturing / damaging non-essential buildings, especially suicidal attempts at fully garrisoned fortresses. Poorly optimised army: too many siege units, too many mercenary units but not enough real fighting force. Does not interact with the player - they don't seem to care about what you are up to; they just attack walls and towers as they wish. Unwise expansions - too many civic centres placed at poorly chosen areas when they really need to defend their main base. Suicidal support units: they send women and traders into battle or under enemy towers Not playing: when checking the replays, I often see the AIs doing absolutely nothing for some time. If you spot any additional flaws, you are more than welcome to append to the list.

Should work now.

Weird, does this one work? https://rvlt.gg/nFDp5agg (maybe the link expire) 0 A.D. Empires Ascendant is the name.

0 A.D. has a semi official revolt server (you can find the link here: https://linktr.ee/wildfire_games) however since it started over a year ago it did not gain any traction. Source for that? Can but it's harder, though you can just use imgur or something Right click send private message ? /join private-room ? Can't you use webchat.quakenet.org?

The whole GUI ? source/simulation2/components/CCmpRangemanager.cpp and source/simulation2/helpers/Los.h

Do you get that error as soon as you launch the appimage? If so I would suggest reporting that on the Github or directly to @andy5995

I say we should address this at the without thought item: bring balance to melee vs ranged engagements -> sniping becomes one of many options for micro AND only certain fights may be won by sniping.

In settings you can also adjust the hp fraction that classifies the unit as wounded or not. Usually the units that I want to evacuate are expensive champions which usually take a lot of damage before dying, so I set it to 1/4 or 1/5 of total hp.

Yes, all of them are in the base game (EA) already.

Excellent. I would be more than happy to think of some techs for these icons. In fact I could add eles to the roster for unit specific upgrades, use two of these, probably the 2nd and 3rd there, and then the 1st and 4th could be unique techs for a certain civ or group of civs.

I would recommend using Revolt as a superior platform to Discord. https://revolt.chat/ It is very similar to Discord in interface and usage. However, it has some advantages compared to the basic Discord. The advantages of Revolt are: Easy registration Open-source, free and has client on all platforms, alongside a web version as well. Has all Discord Nitro features come by default for FREE! Can send large files >8MB Can customize profile and banner as you wish, without any limits Can use more image formats for avatar, including .gif Less vulnerable to raids and other security exploits. Privacy leak is unlikely. The user base is more civilized in general; no illegal activities or sketchy servers. Less hardware demanding Unfortunately, your IRC has some major disadvantages compared to Revolt: Cannot send attached files / images. Cannot voice call, video call nor share screen. Cannot easily create private rooms Tor is banned (one of my favorite browsers ) and the domain of users is displayed in the chat. I consider this a potential privacy leak. Very barebone (ugly) interface and more difficult to install clients for it. With that being said, IRC has some advantages over Discord-like apps: Can enter chats with just a nickname, without email - completely anonymous. Very fast response due to simpler protocol and less data being transferred. In conclusion, I would strongly recommend using Revolt as opposed to Discord since we are all lovers of FOSS and privacy. Revolt offers us exactly that, on top of having Nitro features. If you wish to talk to me on Revolt and need my username, please send me a Personal Message.

Yes is "o"