Leaderboard

Hi @Adriano0ad, I'm guessing what you mean is that you resized the panel and now you want icons to fit better in the panel. The spacing is calculated dynamically so you should only have to increase the number of items per row. In the selection_panels.js for example : g_SelectionPanels.Construction = { "getMaxNumberOfItems": function() { return 40 - getNumberOfRightPanelButtons(); }, "rowLength": 10, // <<<< INCREASE THIS NUMBER to 12 for example "getItems": function() { ...

It would be great to have some level of or option for intrinsic / automatic (unassigned) building repair by units having that skill. Just like the priest or doctor unit intrinsically heals nearby injured units. A farmer wouldn't stand idle while their farmhouse is damaged. The same goes for any unit with building skills. This seems natural to me and would allow the player to focus more on strategy. I love this game, love the music !

+1 Can be beneficial if you repair one siege and the other is damaged too, but if storehouses get repaired it's waste of time. But having one or two units in this repair mode would be kind of nice in general. But if it matters to you setting the repair in queue is also not too much apm intensive.

Thank you very much for the explanations. I ended up uninstalling and reinstalling the game to get it back to normal haha. Now you can try modifying the layout and adjusting a few things again. Thanks for the help, and I'll come back and share the results later =D

Ah, I was wrong indeed, thanks @Mentula, the items margins aren't calculated dynamically relative to the containers size. Unlikely that you want to create proxies to re-overwrite them thoughts, if you changed them or if there is a issue with the icon size, better fix it.

Ok, it seems that talking about battalions has inflamed the debate ahaha but is good! There are so many different visions, but the core game keeps improving this way! Another mentioned aspect was about resources placement on the map and I just wanted to say how I really like the big stone quarries that I've seen in some recent maps (Oases, I think?). Is a very interesting visual detail and maybe a path to go in future maps and releases. Instead of many boulders randomly placed, some big extraction areas in few strategic points of the map. This would "force" a more proactive gameplay towards map exploration and strategic control. Definitely can add "flavour" to the game experience Anyway I'm just returning to play again due to winter holidays and the game is still as fun as ever ahaha

I think Starcraft 2 had something similar where you could set workers to auto-repair.

Hi @Adriano0ad, Here is a solution if you want to control the margin between buttons dynamically. No file replacement needed. If you want to change the margin for all panels: setPanelObjectPosition = new Proxy(setPanelObjectPosition, {apply: function(target, thisArg, args) { const vMargin = 3; // Vertical margin between buttons const hMargin = 3; // Horizontal margin between buttons target(args[0], args[1], args[2], vMargin, hMargin); }}); and place this code in a new file gui/session/unit_commands~MyMod.js. If instead, you want to change the margin for one/some panel(s) only (f.e. "Construction" panel): g_SelectionPanels.Construction.setupButton = new Proxy(g_SelectionPanels.Construction.setupButton, {apply: function(target, thisArg, args) { const ret = target(...args); // Run original function const vMargin = 3; // Vertical margin between buttons const hMargin = 3; // Horizontal margin between buttons const data = args[0]; setPanelObjectPosition(data.button, data.i + getNumberOfRightPanelButtons(), data.rowLength, vMargin, hMargin); return ret; }}); and place this code in a new file gui/session/selection_panels~MyMod.js.

That would be a completely different game mode. You'd have to create entire battalions. Like in Battle for the middle earth. It would also resemble praetorians in that sense. That's understandable. You would also need an AI that emulates the movement of an RTT. And that the formations maintain and fight in formation(single formation).

On the Formation control "No override" setting: Is this now actively decided that it shall be in r28? I noticed it's still in there. I'd vote against it if there would be a vote. The highest effect of formations are currently at the mining and capturing. And it makes no sense. It doesn't require much skill. The player only needs to know there's a weird setting and then set the units at the mines on a formation. Like you just need to set "fast mining".

As casual player, I have to say that the game doesn't *necessarily* lack anything: visuals are really beautiful and keep improving each release and overall is a solid, reliable game that I like exactly because it stay true to the pure rts formula. Which is rare nowadays. But at the same time, if we are to improve something, I would also agree that the game tend to stale in the lategame part, because of lack of "extra" techs or elements that keeps playing engaging after reaching the final stage. I think Burrito is really onto something when he mentiones "dopamine effect" that comes with feeling of accomplishment. Probably this is an element that can elevate the game feel overall. What AOE did really well, was marking each phase with great visual improvements. You really have a sense of accomplishment after each stage, especially in how buildings looked. Something missing a little in 0ad. But this is all easier said than done: making new skin/buildings for each stage requires a massive effort from art department, extra disc space in the final download and lot of time to develop. However is an element to consider. With units would be the same, but I think even small cues, such as naming a more experienced soldier into "élite" or whatever synonym, could add this sense of improvement, like going from basic Hastati 》 Royal Hastati 》 Élite Hastati or something like that, to mark a difference between each improvement, could add to the experience of progression. Just a simple idea. I used to play a game as kid, Imperium by Haemimont Games. There was also unit experience there and a visual cue was their shield and armours would turn more and more gold the higher up they went. Maybe a simple visual element like that could also work without re-making every single unit? Just another simple idea. All of these are not "necessary" changes, but tweaking on this idea of progression can improve the game experience to the late stage. About battalions. While they may be interesting, I'm not sure is the only way to go. I really like the current concept of "soft battalions" that form naturally if you click a group of units, while keeping each unit singular. Maybe the same concept can be "hardened" with a specific button to merge a group of units into a battalion and eventually disband them. But the reason I'm not completely a fan is because I used to play also another game that combined this with rts: Praetorians. And the whole battalion thing, while being cool to play, it also bored me quite quickly, because it lacked another concept that is "human immersion". Big group of units quickly feel like mere cannon fodder and there's something a little special about starting with few units, or make them survive from an enemy or make them "grow" etc.. is a feeling of classic rts that may be worth keeping, while adding other improvements. I hope I could give some constructive opinions. As I said, is only a perception from a casual player. The game is already fun and cool to play

What do you think 0 A.D. lacks? Battalions

Hey everybody! The newest release is out, Version 0.6.0: Aquamentus. This release adds the nomadic Zola civilization, several new maps and GUI tweaks, and two new unit systems: Stealth and Camouflage! Check out the download pages to learn more: https://www.moddb.com/mods/hyrule-conquest-revival/downloads/hyrule-conquest-revival-060 and https://github.com/Perzival123/Hyrule-Conquest-Revival/releases/tag/v0.6.0.

A tower cost 200 resources, same as 2 infantry, we'll take account build time and say 3 infantry... Considering this, you can see why building a tower SHOULDNT be too strong as to for the enemy spend excessive time to take it out. When the building balance is making buildings too strong, then game stalls and it's boring. Which is why this alpha (a27) is refreshing because building are balanced. We can make the same comparison we did with towers with other buildings like CC and forts both as costly as 9 infantry. Yet a CC even being easier to capture now can score 80 kills as I often witness in games, and forts even more (100 not being uncommon even saw 169 once). The towers enemy capture in your own territory, decay 10 capture point/sec iirc, so recapturing them is actually much more at the advantage of the original owner. Next alpha, CC and forts will be back at being almost impossible to capture, which I regret because it will close strategic options, forcing players to always go for rams, even when you only need to defeat a naked CC. But I guess the majority of people think that's how it should be..

Erechtheion and carytids from the acropolis in athens https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erechtheion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caryatid https://www.artstation.com/artwork/lxY91a 1228892164_erechtheion0_28.1.zip licence

Sure, here you go 942182649_erechtheion0_28.2.zip