Leaderboard

I feel the current wooden walls are okay in terms of hitpoints and cost, but are strategically very nearly pointless. From a pure strategy game point of view, a wooden wall serves to buy some time when performing a risky strategy such as fast-teching, where you need to delay the enemy a little while to give your few ranged units a chance to weaken them or buy the time to produce more units. Or to give time to bring your army to bear. Or to make a weak harassing force turn around and go home. From a balance perspective the wall doesn't need to delay an attack for long. If the wall lets a player go without units, if an opponent effectively gets stone-walled by a stone wall, then the game balance is off. In most cases, players will prefer to wall off their base using buildings, as this involves very nearly no additional cost. On maps and for civs where this is possible (obviously much easier with cheap houses) the only real use for a wooden wall is for a gate, although gates are not really needed for a component player as there is enough strategic value in having a chokepoint, or you can do a total walloff with a barracks which has it's exit on the outside, and later remove a house to make a hole. Walls are not really practical when there aren't already natural chokepoints. The problem is that walling the enemy out is the same as walling yourself in. It is essentially giving your opponent an unopposed victory as they can either expand or tech more quickly and so will have an advantage in resources and/or technology. The expense of building the wall is never going to be recouped and early in the game wood is *the* limiting resource. That wood means a slower tech, fewer harassing units, or fewer soldiers which could be harvesting. It's just not viable to spend more than a hundred or so wood on walls. One interesting idea would be if wooden walls could be built in neutral territory, suffering the same decay as scout posts. This would help to distinguish them from house wall-ins, and make them a more useful defence against rushes as choke points could be walled off on more maps. Note that wooden walls in neutral territory would be by no means a guaranteed defense even on maps with suitable chokepoints, as cavalry harassment can arrive very early, definitely early enough to kill or at least hamper the units building the walls. There is a kind of exploit which you can do with walls, you can build the wall then delete the towers. The long wall spans are cheaper and build more quickly than the 'towers', and oddly enough deleting the towers doesn't leave any holes in the wall, if you do it right the wall still seals perfectly (wooden walls always seal perfectly even without towers, stone walls require some attention as if you use maximum length spans it doesn't work, but stone wall spans can overlap if they are less than maximum length, thus sealing the hole). For stone walls this permits building the wall at a cost of 30 stone per span which is way cheaper than the 130 stone for a span with a tower, and the build time is much quicker. Wooden walls do not enjoy such large benefits from deleting the towers, you still save about 1/2 the cost and build time. In some cases deleting towers is a no-brainer as they literally add nothing to the wall, in other cases terminal towers are helpful as they allow extending the wall, and may be required to seal the wall against terrain. There is another kind of exploit, which is deleting (or ignoring) the spans and using the stone wall turrets as towers. Lets compare these wall turrets with normal towers. Wall turrets cost 100 stone, which is 100 metal less than a tower, they build in around 130s, a bit quicker than the ~160s for a tower. They garrison 2 soldiers, vs 5 for a tower. They provide no free shots, while a tower provides 1 (the upgrade adds +1 to both, but it only works with the turret if there is already a unit garrisoned). They have slightly less range. They do not count as one of the 5 buildings for unlocking City Phase, while towers do. At first glance a wall turret is just a cheaper, inferior tower. They cost about half as much, and have about 1/3rd the firepower when fully garrisoned. They DO enjoy all the upgrades which towers enjoy and benefit proportionately more than towers, more than doubling their firepower. But there are two really big advantages of wall turrets. First they have *way* more hitpoints. it depends on the civ, but normally about 3-5x as much hitpoints. Secondly, and perhaps even more importantly, there is no minimum distance restriction, you can build as many wall turrets as you like, as densely as you like, just like towers in nearly every other RTS game (yay!). They have to be built in pairs with a span, but you can delete the span and one of the turrets if you like. So at second glance it can be summarized like this: Early in the game towers are probably a better choice, as they offer much more firepower, and more protection for units, at this point raiding forces will have trouble tearing down a tower even with it's modest ~1000 HP. Later though, upgrades improve wall turrets more, and enemy units become powerful enough to cut down towers quickly, at this point wall turrets are a much better choice as they can offer up to 10x the hitpoints per resource invested, and can be spammed much more densely. Wall turrets would be the natural choice for offensive towering where the enemy has some serious incentive to kill your towers, and where you want/need to creep forward with the towers (turrets do extend influence, so you can creep into enemy territory). Because wall turrets have so much hitpoints and build fairly quickly it is quite practical to build one even under enemy fire, making them good for offensive towering, or for building them when being attacked. Their damage is lackluster without upgrades, but with upgrades they are quite good. In fact late game it would seem there is very little reason to build towers when wall turrets have so much more hitpoints. When balancing stone walls, these exploits or unconventional uses must be taken into consideration too, namely turretless spans, and spanless turrets. I am not certain what the fixes to these exploits would be, although it might work in such a way that a span without a tower is unstable and is destroyed, and a tower without a span is unstable and destroyed, or if not destroyed, at least suffer some kind of penalty to it's effective hitpoints. This would do nothing to address the fact that 'dumbbell' walls could still be used as uber-tough towers with no minimum distance restriction.

Hi, We've started yesterday a "Useful links" section on the wiki. I've pasted your links (with credit to you) to have a little more content on the page. Thanks for all the interesting links !

+Choping wood v2 +Carry ore v2 +Carry wood wtf did smoke that woman at 1:47 ? anyway that video help me a lot, thanks Lion

With the recent questions for help it seemed a good idea to us (shieldwolf and I) to create a tutorial about scenario designing. This post is a small part of it to answer recent questions to creating mods for your maps. (The rest of the tutorial is still WIP and deals with the Battle of Gergovia as you might notice from the text and the screenshots). Click on the images to view a larger size. Setting up a mod and run Atlas Create the folder Browse to <0adfolder>/binaries/data/mods and create a new folder. Call it whatever you like, I call it ‘map_Battle_of_Gergovia’ where ‘map’ is used to distinguish it (for us, humans) from the other mods and ‘Battle of Gergovia’ will be the name of the map. Another option is to browse to My Documents/My Games/0ad/mods and create the folder there. The result is equal. Allow your mod to be recognized by 0 A.D. Open the folder and create a file called ‘mod.json’. Make sure that the extension of the file is changed into ‘.json’. This file is very important! Thanks to this the game will read your mod. Now open that folder in any code editor you like. I use Sublime Text 3 (http://www.sublimetext.com/3) but programs like Notepad++ (http://notepad-plus-plus.org/) are possible too. Your file should read something like my file in the image above. The text you fill in shows up later in the Mod Launcher as you can see further down the post. In the dependencies you define what is needed to run the mod. We choose 0ad since we want people to use it with 0 A.D. It is also possible to specify a version but we don't need that here. Save and close the code editor. Run the Scenario Editor with your mod enabled Now run the game and choose ‘Mod Selection’ in the Tools & Options menu. Select your mod in the list and click ‘Enable’. When in mod is in the lower list, click ‘Save Configuration’ and ‘Start Mods’. After the game has restarted, click ‘Scenario Editor’ in the Tools & Options menu. Atlas will now open and you're ready for the next step. Happy painting!

Well, i'm starting to make new animations for every type of unit in the game. It's a slow work so i'll be uploading every progress on the animation proposal. if something doesn't look good or can be improved please tell me, that's why i made this topic. FEMALE CITIZEN

I don't understand something. If the bag of seeds is carriable on the back why is she holding it ? She should have her arms like this maybe : I can't wait to see how they will look with this little hat on their head

My english is so bad but i'm having too much fun recording these videos to stop Enjoy ^^

Please don't judge my english...

I think that one is better than the last one, it was to much relaxed. She wasn't cutting the tree, she was only removing the cortex. Thanks again, it's more easier work with your feedback. i'll make the missing animations before i start to check out new versions, so if you have recomendations, I can work in all at once.

Is very hard found reverence about woman perform this task in a video. And specially doing a horizontal swing There one most low but not as relax. I can figure it.

thanks helped me a lot with the spartians ( the fisrt post )

Two links from the leisure department showing genetic algorithms at work. The first tries to make a bunch of shapes walk the second drive. All happens in a physical world using the box2d engine. http://rednuht.org/genetic_walkers/ http://rednuht.org/genetic_cars_2/ Have fun!

Thanks for the color variation suggestion Wijitmaker , I thought about multitexture before, but this way is efficient too (it's not player color, but object color). So I kept those colours variations for the male auroch : <group> <variant name="chocolate"> <colour>98 83 78</colour> </variant> <variant name="roan"> <colour>242 219 164</colour> </variant> <variant name="liver"> <colour>172 117 98</colour> </variant> </group> It's quite subtle once in game (compared to cow which are only brown at this time) How the textures look like : I also encoutered a seam problem with the UVs, but since I feel to lazy to unwrap it again , I googled and found this awesome technique : http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/1800/completely_eliminate_texture_seams_.php PS: I just find the tail a bit too thick, even seen from top view, but it's not significant.

I'll drop quickly my input in some of the anims, I'll elaborate more later at home: Mining: I think the arch of swinging the axe should be exaggerated a little bit. The pickaxe don't get momentum, it goes from almost stopped to full speed blow too quick IMHO. Also could use a step forward when giving the blow and move it back to original pose when drawing back the pickaxe?? just thinking loud, you have freedom to see what fits Carrying ore: I like that we're going to have different carrying animations (yay!). I think that when carrying ores, their back should lean backwards (to counter the material weight). Right now they bend forward, which I think looks unnatural. (Imagine yourself carrying something very heavy in your hands walking forward and you'll see how you lean backwards to keep balance) Chopping wood: I know that you used Lion's reference to make the animation (around 1:50 I think) however, that woman is chopping wood as fast as she can for a competition. If you're going to make a hard task like chopping, you want a more relaxed back stance. Right now they're bending too much forward, they'll have a big back ache from that pose if they're going to keep chopping for a long time. Also the legs may be too "crouched" but I think it's because I'm seeing them leaning forward too much. The arms timing and the swing flow is perfect though, I really like it and looks very natural. Carrying wood: Perfect Walking: Looking pretty good Keep up that good work man! really digging your work!

True. Walls, pallisade or stone, generally aren't worth the costs. Either lower the costs of building walls or improve their effectiveness in defending your settlement. Also siege weapons are lacking. Besides the battering ram, where are the Mangonels/Catapults, Trebuchets, Ballistas & Siege towers? We need more siege weapons. Big Warships should also be equiped with onboard Ballistas, Mangonels & Trebuchets so they can attack stone walls and other stone structures effectively. It would make sense if only these siege weapons could damage stone structures. Infantery & Cavalery should be able to damage wooden structures, but not stone structures. Also it would make sense for Infantery & Cavalery to throw firebombs/launch flaming arrows at wooden structures (Instead of hacking at them or shooting arrows at them) This addition would make stone walls & stone defense towers more difficult to bring down and make building walls more worth the costs while adding more strategy to the game at the same time.

You can see it as a chance to learn more Spanish or French It's incredible how english-native speakers really don't like to learn new languages and prefers others to learn english instead