Leaderboard

Quite a fun game here. @Dizaka is pretty OP even when not playing.

It would be nice if you could add units that give bonuses to soldiers such as an eagle/standard bearer for the Romans (to boost morale, maybe it could increase defense), Carnyx players for the Celts (the carnyx sound was used in battle to scare enemies), they would be interesting to add as strategic units but also very scenic.

While playing 1v1, close to victory the opponent closes the game and the server computed it like a loose for me. Must be like: 1. If the host loose the connection to the server it's a win for the team with more punctuation. 2. If a client loose the connection to the server it's a loose for the player and the game continues.

@Imarok@Angen@Nescio@FeXoR *** Warning *** Possible nothingburger/time suck. Self-explanatory underneath Military/Economy Ratio %. ... hadn't found much as to why/if the calculation is not included/required(for the team as a whole) or (for as long as can recall) has always displayed "0", only the gui/summary/counters.js location and its exclusion... Thanks in advance.

Found this, which at least provides some explanation as to how those particular scores are calculated ... https://code.wildfiregames.com/D494 Right, thought this (column) was new with fgod.

Thanks for posting here for me @Boudica - managed to post to Reddit but ran out of time to post here before I had to head out this morning. And darn, did I get @Dakara and @Dizaka mixed up? I probably did, I know I covered Dizaka in a tournament game a while back, you know how crap I am with player names!!!!!!!

KarlJhonson (1195) Vs SuperSpartacus (1041) KarlJhonson (1195) about to loose, quit without resigning metadata.jsoncommands.txt @user1

There are issues with the possibilities of cheating, the game is open source, so with enough technical knowledge, you can run a custom game client that gives you unfair advantage such as by implementing automatic troops micromanagement or to exploit the latency-compensation mechanism. Also, the network code, from my understanding is written in such a way that every player simulates the whole map, so that means that a cheater can remove fog of war and see what other players are doing. Cheaters won't be able to alter unit stats, that will get them out-of-sync. But I don't think these should prevent one from running a competitive gaming scene. Sportsmanship and some level of trust is necessary, and you can't always rule out every form of cheating in any game. This is not unique to 0AD, even commercial games have exactly the same problems to varying degree. Just don't make the prize pool so large that people becomes monetarily motivated to cheat, and action reported cheaters promptly. If you want to run a competitive scene with large monetary sums, you will need to run an offline competition, so that you can control the gaming machines and ensure that players can only use an unmodified version of the game. (actually, I suspect that if you actually try to deliberately make cheating hard and try to implement various rules to make cheating hard, that will probably just invite people who would cheat just to show you wrong; so you either has to go all the way to prove that they're wrong, or rely on sportsmanship)

Wait what? I've never even talked with you about this lel

Most players outside this forum won't know what "Odrysians" are, so I think Thracians works best, just based on the Odrysian kingdom and also some traditional Thracian units as your roster indicates. Thracians and especially Dacians should for sure be added. I will reiterate my opinion that Empires Ascendant should just go ahead and add the later "Part 2" civs to the game. "Part 2" being so far away, it would essentially be its own game and then you might as well go with a different time period, like Medieval or Bronze Age.