Leaderboard

But this is a different point to the one you made before: Is it not? Of course, the impact of "external factors" like stress, sleep deprivation, "mood" etc is much harder to measure than the impact of "internal factors" (and even their impact isnt exactly easy to measure scientifically), which results in both sides of the argument having "the same" leverage; We just dont know if the "mood" will affect performance more or if "macros" will affect performance more, which is why you shouldnt use your opinion regarding this as an argument. And regarding GUI mods not being able to replace player concentration and strategic thinking: This argument falls apart when you consider meta-strategic decisions a desirable part of the game. I'll try to illustrate; RTS games have a plethora of possible actions at any given moment. Each of these actions has strategic implications, some of them very small ones, some very important. In fact, the amount of strategically relevant actions is so great, that you cannot possibly choose the optimal action for every soldier/building at once. A player has thus not only the strategic decisions themselves (Like "which unit to produce" from "which barracks" in "which batch size"), but they additionally have "meta-strategic" decisions (like "which strategic decisions do I think about? Do I spend "brainpower"/concentration on thinking about optimal army compositions early on? Or do I rather focus on economic balancing first?"). For example: While there is a fight going on, I will (most often) choose to concentrate on the fight and accept suboptimal production (just queue anything, as long as the barracks are working). Other players might strategize differently and choose to concentrate more on their production. This meta-strategic decision (of choosing which aspect to think about) will have advantages and disadvantages (like any "normal" strategic decision). But if I had a mod that would always make a "solid" strategic decision in one aspect (Lets say I write a mod [called ECObot™] that automatically realizes when I have too much wood and not enough food and redistributes my workers for me), then I not only give away the strategic decision of economic balancing to my mod (which comes with advantages and disadvantages in and of itself and might thus not be a cheat), I also free myself of the disadvantage of my chosen meta-strategic decision (normally, choosing to focus on your military will result in your own economy suffering from "neglect"; for example suboptimal resource balance since you chose not to think a lot about your economic strategy. But with ECObot™ I don't have this disadvantage). So the meta-strategic decision to focus my attention on my military suddenly got a lot stronger than it would normally be. The mod did not "replace" player concentration, it instead worked in areas the player wouldn't have concentrated on in the first place, which is comparable to an expansion of the players concentration ability/focus.

why? (Fatigue makes me play worse, proGUI also makes me play worse, sounds similar to me ) No for real, both "external factors" that arent connected to the game and "internal factors" like mods can have an impact on how well you play, so atleast in that aspect they can very well be compared. Of course those factors are also sufficiently different in their nature that a comparison will be limited in usefulness.

I'm creating a topic to promote this mod, in which I'm making much of the art created by @Duileoga available. This mod is mainly intended for fun and the promotion of civilizations from the most diverse corners of the world. I hope you like it, as all of this is created in our spare time and without any great intentions, anyone who wants to use art to create the most diverse mods is welcome (and let us know as we would love to play). CIVs: (playable, with some errors, with time they will be resolved) Lusitanos. Mayas. Mochicas. Garamantians. Yamatai. Development (updated): https://github.com/wltonlopes/Endovelico Link official: https://github.com/OilamDuileoga/Endovelico (I'm sorry for my english google translate)

Spoiler, it's a lot of fun. Now that I've spoiled the entire premise of this post, I wanted to thank the development and art team for making something truly unique. I've been following 0 A.D. since I got interested in Linux (around 7-8 years ago), because it was the first package listed in Synaptic, the old GUI package manager. I couldn't play it at the time, my computer barely ran Windows 7, let alone an RTS game full of eye-candy detail. Well, now I can, and the feeling of finally being able to play THAT ONE FREE GAME I've always wanted to play is phenomenal. The fact that this game is free (as in freedom!) is a miracle. I can't even fathom how much work went into this game. Technically, it feels the most like Age of Mythology, while gameplay is most similar to Age of Empires 2. The choice of civilizations is at first daunting, but each one plays similarly enough that you could just pick any and learn as you go. One feature stands out, and it's not intuitive at first. Citizen Soldiers (CS) are both your workers and your basic soldiers. They cost Wood in addition to Food, and some of the swordsmen types can even cost Metal. They might be weak, but they're easy to mass. You would use them primarily to gather Stone and Metal, with few of them on Wood (females gather Wood only slightly slower than males). Since females will be your primary gatherers in the early game, you should avoid making too many of CS in the Village phase. The game begins in earnest in the Town phase, when more of your soldiers become available. Most champion units are still locked behind City phase. More importantly, siege engines can also only be built in this phase (baring a few civs), so your options at storming the enemy towns are limited until the City phase. This might be my only complaint so far. In Age of Empires 2 or Age of Mythology, you get access to siege weapons in the 3rd phase. In addition, 20 Knights can level the Town Center alone, if it's not defended. In 0 A.D., attacking a Civic Center with 20 Town phase cavalry units will likely result in utter failure, wasting resources. Maybe this is a good thing, maybe not. It depends on what kind of player you are. But players should get an option that is not simply "move to the City phase ASAP". Other than that, I had a blast playing Romans, Athenians and Persians so far. I'll try some other civilizations (SPARTAAAAANS! READY!) and ultimately decide on my "goto" civ. This is really a fun game to play on a relaxing rainy day. Absolute chill when compared to the APM madness in StarCraft. And I love it. Thank you so much.

So basically Flemish Revolution lol

There are two (well, three for me) reasons to research Marian Reforms: 1) You are in the lead, and you want to quickly capitalize on that lead by turning all your CS to near-champion level troops. A kind of a "win more" move. The point of Marian Reforms is not to train the new units, but rather convert the existing ones. 2) You are behind, and your only way to somehow survive and counterattack is to get the tech and overwhelm your enemy. A kind of a "last stand gambit" move. Third reason is purely based on fashion. I like the new icons and the unit models, so I research Marian Reforms anyway. They're super cool to look at. Also, you get to train real Legionaries, duh. But, some of your points are valid. Roman basic infantry is strong, even the spearman. Spear cavalry is also great. However, they're not cool

The way they were done in the mod, mostly, as the mod is built around the game, rather than part for it. Then because nobody ported the code to Trac/Phab/Gitea

Hi there, been greatly enjoying A27 so far. The new additions to Rome have been great, especially second phase castrums. However I wanted to give some feedback on Marian reforms in particular. I have found it a bit underwhelming and constraining in what it does. Onagers are fun and feel like the main draw for doing the Reforms. however the rest of what you get feels less than what you could do before doing Reforms. Eg you already get second rank infantry(Spear and Sword) out your castrum, your skirmishers now require metal which I have always found very off-putting as metal in my books is better spent on champions/sword units and blacksmithing, and you lose access to field promotion of centurions which now take rather a long time to get from fortresses. Not to mention that your only spear unit is now much worse at his job of stabbing horses because he is capped at first rank. The point is that Marians Reforms feels like a constraint on tactical capabilities and unless you are on a metal heavy rich environment fighting someone only using infantry you are much better off never getting it. Also why are the first cohort legionaries not included in the Centurion's Century Manoeuvres ability as they are clearly meant to be veteran Marian legionaries? All that being said, I like the concept of the tech, and I would like to see it be a more tantalising option than what it currently is. So for starters perhaps the First Cohort legionaries could be included in Century Manoeuvres. Then more ambitiously one could explore having Marian legionaries use the classic pilum and do the switching business between melee and range. maybe give them lower attack but maintain the normal armour of the melee half, essentially an armoured skirmisher. Even more ambitiously one can do this for the first cohort legionaries as well. On a basic level switching the spearman for the skirmisher and having legionary spearman and conscript skirmishers instead. Rome has a most annoying weakness to heavy cavalry, which I think is probably just true for a lot of civs, except Sparta of course. An alternative take could be having Marian legionaries switch between sword and spear.

Hello, a user named Hanisx (1573) quit a rated 1v1 against me. commands.txtmetadata.json

For the Git version you need to download SPIR-V shaders: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/wiki/BuildInstructionsGettingTheCode#vulkan-shaders

*cough* A27 Could you share you userreport_hwdetect.txt? Could you try Vulkan renderer?

Imagine if the formation combat system was improved and made more tactical. It could be played less frantically and allow for more maneuvers in the battlefield. I'm not saying it should be slow, but it should allow you to relax while supervising a fight.

I expressed myself poorly due to my lack of understanding my own mind/behaviour. My main goal was to give you an (albeit very subjective/singular) example of a player (myself) whose concentration is connected to the amount of meaningful inputs he can give the game, as you claimed those two measures to be generally distinct. It might only be tangential to the main point. I'll try to phrase it more eloquently: In some 4v4 teamgames, the performance drops to single digit fps (mostly during large fights) with additional input delay and stuttering due to network issues with some players. This results in a "stop-and-go" experience, where some things happen, then the game freezes for a moment (it is still possible to move the camara and give out commands), then something happens again, it freezes again... Each "freeze" in this case is of the magnitude of up to 1 second (usually). {This performance issue is a seperate one and is also being addressed already, so we dont have to go into any greater detail here} This "stop-and-go" phenomenon results in the player effectively having "unlimited" (a lot of) time to micro-manage and do many things at once (since you get up to a whole second every other second where nothing happens but you can still give out commands). It is thus compareable to changing the game speed to 0.5x or slower. Now, theoretically this should make it easier to execute any strategy, as you have a lot of time to click all the necessary buttons and a lot of extra time to think about what you should do, But (and the following is only my experience and should not be generalized) what actually happens is, that I have way too much "free time", I stop having to click all the time and stay alert all the time because, well, nothing is happening. And playing at "0.5x speed" (or the lag equivalent) means I only need half as many APM. At this point I get bored and stop thinking about tactics/strategy entirely (atleast thats what I think is happening. As mentioned at the start I do not know why I am unable to keep on playing the game "normally", but I just catch myself zoning out and watching helplessly as I lose the game). The only thing I can say for certain is, that I dont seem to be able to focus/concentrate very well if the game doesnt demand a lot of clicks from me. That's why, atleast in my case, having to click a lot is a necessity for strategically engaging gameplay. That being said, I am the last person to tell anybody how to enjoy 0ad, I just wouldn't want any more automation in the base game.

Thank you so much for this excellent demonstration showing another angle on the claim that making the game fair-by-design isn't hard. I would say that I don't think video-streaming the game to clients is the right answer, though. Lag would be much more consequential, even if it doesn't result in OOS errors. However, I want to place emphasis on this line: This is the point that I am trying to make. It is possible to design the network protocol to fix the holes that I am describing, while allowing it to use even less bandwidth than it already does. Though I don't have the time or experience to create a technical demonstration of how this could work, I do have quite an imagination. I imagine that the simcode would work just like it already does, but with only one simple change: make it possible for the host to send packets ordering units or structures to "pop-in" or "pop-out" of existence. Then, the host would have all of the tools it needs to control what players can see at any given time. The simplest implementation on the host end would be to check on each tick if a unit is entering or leaving a player's vision range, and send the pop-in/pop-out packets for that tick. Each player command should only be synced with clients that have the affected units in their vision range at that moment. Of course, any implementation would work as long as the basic tools are available, so we can separately discuss whether running these calculations on every tick would be too costly for hosts. The host would also no longer need to send data for units that aren't visible for the client, which directly reduces the bandwidth requirements. There are two potential problems with this model, which I think are also easy to solve in principle: The map itself is also a source of valuable information when the Shroud of Darkness is enabled ("Explored Map" setting is turned off). There would need to be a way to stream the actual terrain and resource data to clients as they explore the map, otherwise players could still bypass the shroud of darkness. As I have described before, I can already somewhat bypass the Shroud of Darknesss simply by viewing the black parts of the map from an angle, and observing humps and dips in what is really a silhouette of hills and valleys that I shouldn't be able to see. Then there are replay files. If the client cannot see the whole game state (and they shouldn't), then it's worth reconsidering how replays should work. Perhaps the "pop-in" and "pop-out" commands could be recorded on the replay file directly, creating a "partial" replay, that only shows one perspective of the match. If we want players to be able to see the whole match replay at the end of the match, then this would require the dedicated server to download the replay file to each client once the winner has been determined. Alternatively, there could be a website associated with that provider, allowing players to search for their match (or possibly any match) and download the full replay file on their own time. As I said, they wouldn't need to. Nobody is actually suggesting that we do it this way; this is just a hypothetical example to demonstrate that the real bandwidth requirements to secure the network protocol aren't as you described previously. Look above to see my proposal for the simplest change that would need to be made to make the game fair-by-design. Another great example of a tool that enables a player to play faster is Adderall or caffeine, or other stimulant. I made the point above that when playing online games, it's a fact of life that we can't control factors like fatigue and comfort for all players, and we generally accept this fact. The mood of a player is likely to affect their performance much more than the usage of computer macros or other tools to implement the same behaviors they already have, but with less keystrokes. My case is that this general acceptance should also apply to client-side modifications. It's also worth pointing out that the ability to concentrate (enhanced by stimulants) is completely different from the ability to type or click faster (enhanced by mods). The former of the two is relevant to gameplay, because the inability to concentrate manifests in the lack of awareness of game elements, which leads to flawed strategies being used. The latter, however, is not relevant to gameplay. The inability to type fast manifests in the furious typing or clicking to implement the strategy that one has already formulated and decided on, resulting in direct frustration as the player is unable to mechanically implement their desired behaviors. This is a problem that I have never had when playing in singleplayer, and if it is a frequent problem in multiplayer, then this deserves its own discussion; not about whether GUI mods should be banned, but whether we should make changes in the game to avoid the Confusing UI that results in this frustration: This plays in to a point I made before: some of these tools are not meant as performance tools as much as accessibility tools. A mod that transforms the tree and berry models into red and green cubes would be very helpful to a player who, for whatever reason, has difficulty making out the patterns of these different game objects. It would also be helpful to a player who doesn't have a GPU powerful enough to render the models for the game. If you are arguing that these tools are cheats, you are essentially saying that vision problems, as well as certain neurological differences, constitute flaws in that person's skill in the game, and therefore these people should not be able to play 0 A.D. with us, because of their differences. I think that's absurd and not cool at all.

Hello :3 Long fan of the mod here, playing since 5 years ago in a MAC, love the Mod the visuals and facctions, just made my forum account cus never thought I would ask anything but... I want to ask if the team has plans to add the Visigothic Kingdom of Toledo or the Duchy of Normandy? The first was very intertwined with the Merovingian Franks, like the daughters of the Queen Goiswintha with its first marrige King Athanagild of the Visigoths; Brunhilda married Sigibert I of Austrasia in 567 and the second daughter Glaswintha was the second marrige of Sigibert's brother King Chilperic I of Neustria in 566, while this is the last maarige between Merovingian House and the Balt Dynasty of Toledo the daugter of Brunhilda and Sigibert, Ingunde, married the son of the newly elected King of Toledo Liuvigild (which funnily enough he was married to her Grandmother, Goiswintha), Hermenegild, and because the religuious differences of Ingunde and his grandmother Goiswintha she nearly killed Ingunde in a rage caused Ingunde was of the Latin Confession and the Visigoths where of Arrian Confession causing a civil war between Liuvigild and Hermenegild. The second one is more obvious thanks to norman importance during the X-XI century with Gllâome le Contchérant ("William the Conqueror") and the conquest of the Kingdom of England, and Robèrt Viscart (Robert "The Fox") the founder of the Norman Duchy of Appulia and Calabria (The foundations of the Norman Kingdom of Sicily) and one of the biggest Headecks of the Eastern Roman Emperor Aléxios I Komnēnós andthe son of robert, Bohemond I of Antioch, one of the most important characters of the first Crusade and founder of arguably the Most Important Cruzader State (I'm throwing my hand to the fire with that Take)

Antiquity spear cavalry wasn't able to charge with "couched lance"since they had no stirrups. Couched lance charge is what made spear cavalry devastating in the middle ages. So spear cavalry should be great against other cavalry, against archers, but certainly not against spearmen or any heavily armored unit.

it WORKS omg now the game is a gif on pentium steam machine not a power point

Ok @Genava55 I addressed your suggestions just now in gitea.

@umatbro That one will be a bit hard to install, try the one I shared above. You need to download the zip file, unzip/extract it, and then move it to your mods folder. Here is a guide on where you can find the mods folder: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/wiki/GameDataPaths

pretty much

Text about the wolf warriors. Seems like it could be possible that some ferocious German warriors in ancient times would dress themselves in wolf skins. Especially as a way to "summon" the strength of mythological or religious wolf totem. I don't think that the wolf skin would be very effective as a suit of armor, though. Maybe add them as very brutal, very aggressive melee glass cannon shock troops?

Ok the next release of the community mod is near. I have heard a lot of player concerns and with this release we can try out some changes to see if they improve the situation. Walls may be placed over trees, causing the tree's destruction once complete. Additionally walls give to the garrisoned troops a range bonus in addition to the existing vision range bonus. When destroying walls, they will do damage in a 10 meter wide box (length the same as the wall). Destroyed walls would create a cascade of rubble that would be dangerous to attacking and defending troops. Players have been complaining a lot about hero baiting, so I have some ideas implemented to fix that. Hero acceleration is greatly reduced down to 5 m/s^2. To compensate for being very easy to shoot, they gain an additional 1000 hp. Since the Han have been lacking, I made some changes to the ministers to make them more interesting for dynamic gameplay. In p1, they gain 5 hack damage for each unit they kill. in p2, they gain 10 m/s movement speed. in p3, their last modification is that they trade the sword for a club and do 50 crush damage. This last part is a bit of a stretch historically but I think it will make for an excellent contribution to the way the Han play. Let me know your feedback, and lets get ready to play! (April fools)

Buenos días o tardes ; -Estas son las facciones que ya creé; (Solamente la arquitectura) (A) -Europa (10); ilirios Lusitanos Tracios Suevos(A) íberos(A) dacios(A) Urálicos(A) Dálmatas(A) Épiro(A) Bósforo(A) -Asia (3); Xiongnu (A) Escitas(A) Beduinos(A) -América (8); Mayas Tupí Mochica Guaraní(A) Zapotecas Anishinaabe(A) Arawakos(A) Lencas(A) -África (8); Númidas Garamantes Khoisan(A) Batwa(A) Axumitas(A) Gaetulia(A) Cartago(A) Nok(A) -Oceanía (0); -No tengo suficientes referencias de esa época .Pero los Polinesios, Papúes y Aborígenes Australianos son muy potenciales. Total:29 y sumando. -Para que se hagan una idea más visual , aquí les dejo los mapas;(son extensiones aproximadas...)de las facciones que pretendo crear.Las facciones con estrellas de 5 puntas están creadas o en proceso. -Iré subiendo el contenido que estamos creando @Lopess y yo a este tópico o a los de temáticas relacionadas, si ustedes tienen sugerencias , referencias , críticas , correcciones ,dudas, peticiones etc... no duden en comentarlas . @wowgetoffyourcellphone @wackyserious @Stan` @Sundiata @Mr.lie @Ultimate Aurelian @Lion.Kanzen Disculpen las molestias*