Leaderboard

DE does this in the templates and prevents units from attacking the Shrine and Merc Camp map objects. In template_unit_cavalry_melee.xml <Attack> <Melee> <AttackName>Knife</AttackName> <Damage> <Hack>8.0</Hack> <Pierce>0.0</Pierce> <Crush>0.0</Crush> </Damage> <MaxRange>6.0</MaxRange> <PrepareTime>500</PrepareTime> <RepeatTime>1000</RepeatTime> <Bonuses> <ElephantStench> <Classes>Elephant</Classes> <Multiplier>0.5</Multiplier> </ElephantStench> <CamelStench> <Classes>Camel</Classes> <Multiplier>0.5</Multiplier> </CamelStench> <BonusSiege> <Classes>Siege</Classes> <Multiplier>2.0</Multiplier> </BonusSiege> </Bonuses> <PreferredClasses datatype="tokens">Ranged+Unit Siege</PreferredClasses> <RestrictedClasses datatype="tokens">Permanent Ship</RestrictedClasses> </Melee> </Attack> I have a custom class called Permanent for certain things in DE. You can put Field there instead.

That is expected, multiplayer attracts alot of jerks around ps: maybe PC not very powerful or running antivirus?

A better option, also listed on https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/BuildInstructions#DebianUbuntu: On older Debian / Ubuntu versions you may have to replace libwxgtk3.2-dev with libwxgtk3.0-gtk3-dev.

See http://docs.wildfiregames.com/entity-docs/a26.html Look for restrictedclasses

The only thing that comes close is total war formation positioning, which I think 0 A.D. should have someday, when formations are more than cosmetic changes.

I think racism is perhaps the wrong term, but I will admit that it can feel uncanny. That said, this practice is nothing new. The original Amanra did have a bit of an accent. Ultimately, I think that they should have had gone the 300 route and made them all speak proper Glaswegian.

I just did quick research (googleing "wildfiregames.com" for "citizen solider" term) trying to understand why we have concept of CS. Just as FYI, I don't suggest anything. more relevant: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/40114-balancing-citizen-soldiers-cs-long-shot/ https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/39378-gameplay-issue-booming-turtling/ a bit less relevant (imho): https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/20617-why-the-citizen-soldier-concept-is-wrong/ https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/22017-trying-to-trace-back-the-citizen-soldier/

I agree with @BeTe that the tactical decisions you have in p2 are somewhat limited and could be expanded. I believe it might be worth considering to add more "half-champion" units like the naked fanatics, that serve the purpose of a trained soldier rather then a citizen soldier, but don't have the equipment requirements (and according metal cost) of an actual champion. Because at the moment, champions represent the pinnacle of soldiery a certain civilization was able to muster, while citizen soldiers are, the way they function in the game, just normal workers you gave a spear or a sword. I believe a unit type between those two makes a lot of sense and could positively impact the tactical elements of the game aswell, as it gives players an option to actually fight a booming player (without running your own gatherers/citizen soldiers across the map and thereby sacrificing your eco) and not just raid them. It would also somewhat negate the booming = turteling problem, as you would have access to stronger units in p2, that can pose a threat to a player that just booms, but can't gather resources themselves. It would also have the side effect that battles might happen sooner with smaller armies, which some people might enjoy An alternative would be to add normal workers, that can fight notably worse than citizen soldiers, which is basically the same concept of adding a third (or fourth if you count mercenaries) type of unit, but might be easier to implement. If one were to add workers, they could be produced as fast as citizen soldiers are at the moment, while citizen soldiers get increased build time. That way you wouldn't need to decrease the build time of champions to make them more useful and you would slow down the game overall... (I would welcome a change like that, but I understand that others like how fast 0ad plays)

What would be super cool is to have a charge bonus on shock cavalry like the companions but i guess it is also extra code...

This can be made so that it makes the formations useful as well

This sounds absolutely awful.

Oh yeah, and 0 A.D.'s right-drag-click to draw units into a line or shape is super super awesome. No Age game has that. I find it is very crucial to properly microing your dudes at a mid-level.

So, I played the stress test. The UI is nice. A lot more polished than 0 A.D.'s UI. We can probably take a lot of cues for AOMR's UI design. I prefer 0 A.D.'s centered HUD though and DE's/BoonGUI's nice big minimap on the left. AOMR's is on the right, and it bothered me, though it does have some nice features. Like, you see rally point/waypoint animations on the minimap. Something 0 A.D. should have. There were things I liked more in 0 A.D., though, specifically quality of life things, like WASD camera movement, which I missed sorely in AOMR. Like, I reeeeally missed the WASD camera controls in AOMR. Not a fan of pushing the cursor to the edge of the screen to move the camera. I like how 0 A.D. has right-click on an icon to open the info panel. Other things in 0 A.D. that I miss in AOMR are the rally point lines on the ground and cursor changing to the action when hovering over a target to set a rally point. Everything is well done in AOMR, but I honestly like 0 A.D.'s aesthetics more (not biased at all). AOMR has wayyyyy better particles and very nice shore waves for beaches. While 0 A.D.'s water is very nice, one thing it lacks is nice shore waves and ship wakes. I liked AOMR's zoom, how it lets you zoom right up on the units and the camera tilts upward slightly. Liked that. Showed off the really quality textures the game has. I'd like to do that for 0 A.D., but go even further to where you can zoom really far out and the camera tilts downward and sounds fade out a bit and you hear wind over everything. All-in-all, once I get used to AOM's controls again, I'm going to really like it. It's way ahead of 0 A.D. on some things, but in other ways I really like 0 A.D.'s controls and QOL things more.

What a wonderful game! That was my favourite RTS as a kid I played on a local server called Ombuserver with a cracked copy I still remember the CD-Key number. It was a famous one, starts with 3630.... The difficulty and learning curve of the games have eased over the years as the gaming industry has changed. This is not something exclusive to RTS games, regardless of the fact that they have always been very complex games compared to other genres. On a visual level, it must be said that the era of pre-rendered graphics has had milestones of beauty and personal style never achieved by the 100% 3D era. Good old days? Maybe.... I think one of the characteristics of 0ad is the scale of its battles, and I think this is something good to highlight and preserve. An army of 100/180 units fighting against another is something epic and remarkable about the game. I think that perhaps the "simplification" could cover other aspects such as the amount of technologies possible to research, the need to unlock units in order to produce them. Aspects that can end up resulting in the player avoiding even trying to produce a specific unit due to the resources and time that he has to dedicate to be able to enable units. Something I've been thinking about and am very curious about is how the dynamics of the game would change if the number of possible units to select were limited. The StarCraft community has always complained about this number being so small when, like 0ad in standard configuration, the maximum production limit is 200 units. However, could this limitation when selecting units substantially modify the dynamics of a huge army moving across the map? What do you think? It must be said that SC 1 had a moment of stagnation in the game's meta when in the end everything came down to massing a single unit and thus winning the game. I don't know if this has changed over time and, although at the top of the competitive field it was very common to see very innovative strategies with tech units that, thanks to their special abilities, could tip the balance to one side or the other, the truth is that at the average level the game's meta ended up being massing a unit before your enemy and overtaking them by taking advantage of the snowball effect after winning the first battle. Some of this snowball effect is also present in 0ad and that's why it's so important not to kill your army because a first defeat on the battlefield will in most cases end with the defeat of that player or the defeat of that edge, speaking of TGs. I think in AOE II this snowball effect is a bit more difficult because of its "hard counter" model, where one can choose to switch to another unit to counter the enemy's unit. In this sense, I think that what we should aim for is to "disarm" or improve the 0ad meta so that not everything is reduced to an economic race in which each player tries to get to a full army, full tech + rams faster to win the battle. I think that at an average level of play it is simpler to stick to an effective strategy than to risk trying innovative things, since, most likely, these will give worse results than the classic boom race. The "fear of failure", in such a small community, with so few hosts and game options, can also play a role in this sort of homogenization of gameplay. I think that dynamizing phases 1 and 2 to create new game meta in early and mid game is a good starting point.

Also, "unique" doesn't have to be gimmicky. Some special aura or ability is good, while the base usage of the unit mostly still conforms to its type. So, for instance, the Iberian champ cav still has its Jav Cav usage and stats, but also its ability to damage buildings which is unique among the Jav Cav type. Macedonian Hypaspists can be upgraded to Silver Shields. Perhaps in this mode they have a small aura that boosts nearby troops a little. In the later Macedonian kingdom, Hypaspists became administrators and officers, so this small feature could indicate that. The Macedonian Companion Cavalry could be slightly faster than other champ cavs and have a small (10%?) attack bonus vs. infantry, but costs slightly more. Persian Immortals can already switch between Spear and Bow. Maybe also give them a "Campaign Panoply" tech that upgrades their look (and stats) from palace guard robes to scale mail (this is in DE). And also give the player the ability to train either the melee or ranged version by default, so if they actually want the ranged version they don't always have to train the melee version first. The Bactrian Cataphract's attack could have some splash damage. Perhaps a feature of all Cataphracts (the other being the Seleucid Cataphract). Spartan Spartiate hoplites could give an armor boost to other hoplites nearby. I mean a very very small radius, like 3 meters, to simulate a "shield wall"/"phalanx" effect. Also, look into how DE makes the Skiritai Runner more interesting. Brythonic Chariot could have its rider jump off when the chariot is killed. He then runs at the enemy with a sword, maybe getting a kill before himself getting killed. Seleucid Scythe Chariots could have a trample aura. This needs extra code, but has been desired for some time.

Yeah im thinking like at least one unique unit per civ give or take.

Developing is proceeding nicely. I've recently added ranks for Leonidas: Untested, Heroic, Legendary, and Mythical. He gets super stronk by the final rank and can be upgraded to "Frenzy" mode where he slices through dozens of fools, 300-style, but constantly loses health. I really only have 1 tooltip bug, and that feature is complete. Leonidas' other features include his "Royal Marriage" tech, which unlocks a secondary hero, Gorgo, his "Agoge" bonus, which gives him +10% attack more than other heroes, and his "Last Stand" aura, which boosts the health of closely nearby hoplites by +50%. Sadly, no one seems to be posting videos of the mod or even the base game.

I'm thinking we should just standardize it to "catapult." Onagers are catapults, in the broad sense. "Stone throwers" might be needlessly pedantic and "catapult" is a term most people understand. "Bolt shooters" though seems to be a good term for scorpions and oxybeles.

At 200 population 2 vs 2, even with the graphics turned down to maximum the game jerks to death. The fluidity is ruined. Formations hesitate to fight their way through, often react badly to the enemy. It's super annoying. No ease, no fun. A good old stronghold from the 2000s works much better. Too bad, it was tempting. Disappointed.

I would say its more likely the AIs.

The upcoming Alpha 26.

What does A26 mean?

Seems like your CPU might be the issue here. This game is really CPU bound :/ Your CPU is from 2008 It might get a bit better in A26 but you won't get a satisfactory experience, I'm sorry.

When you say it's jerky do you have 10 FPS or 40 FPS? I know I start at 200 something and it goes lower and I have a laptop with a 1070. A few things you can do to help us pinpoint the issue. Press F11 when the game lags and take a screenshot (F2) (they are stored in my documents) Press Shift + F11 when the game lags and upload the profile.txt file https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/GameDataPaths You might also upload userreport_hwdetect.txt and system_info.txt from that folder. Any help is appreciated.

what are your specs?

Quick color adjustment to make the gold look more gold:

Hello, since I installed 0ad I experience heavy FPS drops & constant 10 FPS in all games. Other players have no such problems! How is that possible? Hardware changes makes no difference. When I change from an i5-4460 to an Ryzen 7 2700 it makes no difference. Graphics card from GTX 960 or GTX 1060 or Radeon 5700 gives the same exact FPS numbers!.. Watch the profile.txt's of some multiplayer games that I fast saved. Thanks in advance, your TGODTaylor profile_with_20_fps.txt profile_with_50_fps.txt

Disclaimer: This was done on one night, based heavily on one person’s comment, from one small voice (me) who is a peasant exercising his right on free speech. Quote in the "Resource System & Map control Elements" Following on @Wesley's comment, I went and tried to trace back the original intention of the Citizen Soldier up to the state they are currently in (not with research, but with assumptions, so go ahead and fault me for that). Now if 0 A.D.’s thesis in the Starting Game is “Make each Faction immediately recognizable”, then I believe they are successful in that. If I chose “Random” before we start, then I can immediately tell what Faction I’m controlling just by looking at the Civic Center and the units I have without looking at the Emblem at the center top part of the UI. This is where 0 A.D. improves over AoE2. Now, the Citizen Soldiers have inherited that aspect. Although they’re being mocked as “Soldiers who can gather”, they’re actually “Villagers who can fight” (Yes I’ll be relying on "'living' is not the same as 'not dying'" logic). If you’re complaining that you’d rather gather with these guys, then you shouldn't since they were intended to do that. It's players like me who are the ones using them in an un-orthodox manner (sending them to war). The reason why we have Champion Spams back then is that it is the original intention of the game: Gather with Citizen Soldiers, then send the Champions to war. But then, some things happened over the years: Horsemen have become a lot faster (they were nearly as fast as walking soldiers back then). Champion (Pure Military) Units have increased their train time. Citizen Soldiers received some rebalancing of stats. What all this all means is that the Citizen Soldiers have taken center stage both in the Economy and Military side of things. And, you know what? This further led me to recognize what @DarcReaver has been actively harping over the forums recently: Citizen Soldiers broke the game. 1. You can’t Distinguish between Economic and Military Units New players shouldn’t be going “Oh, my soldiers can gather and build. That’s cool!”. They should’ve been going “Oh, my villagers can defend themselves. That’s cool!” They don’t see Citizen Soldiers as Economic Units with Fighting as an add-on, they identify them as Military Units with Gather/Build as the add-on. The reason why we see @drsingh complaining about the Civic Center being able to train Military Units is that he doesn’t see the Citizen Soldiers as Economic Units. And judging from the game’s current state his complaint has become valid. 2. Lack of Military Unit Diversity And here's another problem, guys. If you’re wondering why we don’t have enough diversity in Champions or any Pure Military Units for that matter, then the reason is that most of the units went into the Citizen Soldier category. This must be the reason why I feel that Phase 2 is the emptiest phase in the game. You’re not presented with more military, you're presented with more gatherers. Here’s another thing. The elephant is a Soldier-type unit for whatever reason. But looking at a certain unit progression. I believe the original intention was this: Phase 1 – Citizen Soldiers + Women Phase 2 – Soldiers Phase 3 – Champions + Heroes That’s one way I can make sense for why there is a soldier-type unit. Now with all that in mind, I think we should not remove the gathering ability of the Citizen Soldiers since that was the original intention. Rather, something must be done with the military strength they obtained over the years. I think they should be nerfed. Rush Cavs (as much as I personally like to have that strategy available) should not be possible. Cavs should either lose their gathering capabilities, or they are not available in the Civic Center. A little harassment here and there can still be a staple in the early game, but rushes might not be good for a game that has city-building also in mind. Make Town Phase more relevant by putting the Town Phase Units from Citizen Soldiers to Soldier category. Yes, I know this post has come to a set of suggestions, but I believe this was the original gameflow of 0 A.D. Only that much of the playerbase has dictated to where it is now. Now, go. Tear down my arguments. I was just here to ramble.

Slave ( male female): bonus for gathering, but they die if the work is inhumanity, can help to build, and have bonus to build but decreases their lives. Peasant/ foreman/ overseer: defense vs animal wild, bonus to gather farm animal.( men) Women villager: as vanilla same bonus from farming and foraging. More hp. Militia: a villager that are strong vs villager can work but is primary military basic unit.(men) militia is the first unit can you train and their role is reading , keep safe new settlements , can use range and melee weapons but, don't use armor, don't have access to upgrades from blacksmith, can have bonus vs predators, ( wolfs , lions, tigers, etc) is weak vs citizen soldier, only can be good to keep save by a raid by light cavalry and uses defenses very well, like towers, turrets, sentry tower. Can repairing building. Slave master( Roman, Carthaginian and Hellenistic) this rol is replaced for the Overseer in other cultures.( men and women only needs a variation).

Yes imitating one my childhood artist ( Akira Toriyama) but can be better the paint of the characters.

I was thinking more the lines of "Citizen Soldiers should only exist in the Civic Center and nothing more". They can serve both as your melee and ranged hunters/miners/lumberjacks at the start of the game. Women will retain their foraging specialty. The rest should be regular soldiers... and then transition into champions and heroes. As long as they can keep their cultural distinctiveness at the start of the game (aesthetics), then they've done their part. Citizen Soldiers can be kept as a unique feature, but not as the central feature. Looking back at it, I never had a problem with Soldiers gathering. But now it seems silly to me when I look at it from a Villager perspective: Civic Center- Oh look, gatherers! Barracks - Oh look, more gatherers! Embassies - Oh look, I can hire gatherers! Battles - Oh look, I'm sending my gatherers to war! I have never treated the feature that I love in such a mocking way. It amuses me because I still love it nonetheless.

I think this volcano (Dodecanese) looks really off. Besides the various straight lines, the hot top seems unnatural; I've just read the wikipedia article about eruptions and looked at numerous pics and it only confirmed my impression.