Leaderboard

I will also add that, for now I don't really see a point in doing a (significant enough) cavalry nerf. At the end of the day, infantry is still hugely useful in 1v1 and in team games as well, a transition to cavalry if not well timed can just lead to being overrun by infantry. For the current state I only see a small damage nerf to skirm cav to be interesting. I'd consider the gameplay of mostly ranged infantry CS to be worse. There is not even an attempt in transitioning away from a unit we make from the beginning of the game. Instead of fine tuning stuff like this, I'd be more interested in some more radical changes, such as for example straight up halving the attack rate of all ranged units (so reducing their DPS by that much), accompanied by a melee cav nerf. That could rehabilate melee infantry and maybe champions as well. Experiment, bring new units to the light, try to reach a new balance.

-Good idea, my initial idea was this, but currently I believe that an update to towers with wasp attack would be more plausible; -We can apply this to the traditional mod, and leave the two units separate for the extended mod. That's our idea XD This was mainly done for the AI to know how to use the units, they are not champions or "normal" units the orders of warriors or noble warriors are stronger and faster units because they are better equipped and training, unfortunately I don't know how to say this to AI without putting them like cavalry behind the scenes.

the third option is good, no need to remove it. you can say no, if you don't say no, then it's not a no.

Following change may break some mods: For security reasons planing to restrict access for ReadFile, ReadFileLines, WriteJSONFile, ReadJSONFile, ListDirectoryFiles, FileExists to the following folders/files: "gui, simulation, maps, campaigns, saves/campaigns, config/matchsettings.json, config/matchsettings.mp.json" adding "moddata" if some mods need to access and ship custom files that don't fit into other locations mentioned above (https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4617)

sending res is such a good counter to rushes in team games.

About chicken rushes in team games, I agree that in the case of one team having an imbalanced line-up like 1800 + 1300s, if the all-in is well executed it could be possible to slow down the 1800 at the price of slowing down even more a lower rated player and therefore winning the game. However, the chicken rush is not the only way to do it, for example a 2v1 rush could do it well and is not new. I have not seen enough TGs to see if it is a problem. One all-in strategy was done against me this alpha but it was using ranged inf CS not cav, and was unsuccessful. It is tricky because if the defender gets even a 20 pop advantage early on against his adversary that can easily snowball to victory without the pocket's situation being relevant. If the chicken rush really is a problem in TGs, then a 2min or 3min ceasefire could do the trick. Also having teammates sending resources could help a lot, as you could safely build your forces without being slow down too much.

@Lion.Kanzen@maroder@wowgetoffyourcellphone This way, we only need to keep the Wiki up to date. What do you think about this approach? If you agree in principle, I can certainly make it nicer. The modified files are attached FYI (no diffs, though). gamepaths.txt gamepaths.xml MainMenuItems.js

J Towers with wasp attack sounds even better actually, haven't seen a defensive structure with unique attack! I look forward to what you guys have planned with the extended mod! Now the cavalry makes sense, with it helping the ai function better.

what's the chicken rush exactly? attacking whith 4 cav at minute 1? that's just false. a larger group of infantry if managed well can negate a cav rush.

Kind of a good idea, actually! Just need to change the footprint shape from oval to circle.

right. cavalry rushes are not quite op I believe. many players never ever do them.

I think the implementation was made by @wackyserious but I am not sure. I understand the idea but I think it is more confusing than helpful by bringing diversity. Your idea is a bit better but it would require a bit of coding. The fanatic is also exclusive to the Gauls, so it is also important to not make the two factions more confusing.

I have practically no programming experience, so eventually I decided that this was one too many complications for me, and gave up trying to learn how to mod 0 A.D. That being said, I would be happy to help out in an advisory role. I'm no Howard scholar, but I do have some understanding of the source material, and have been slowly chipping away at making a role-playing game adaptation of the Hyborian Age, so I might be of use in selecting the best quotations and descriptions. Another facet of my RPG adaptation is creating a 3-D Hyborian Age globe, which obviously opens the door for translation to a 0 A.D. map. I'm awaiting a reply from someone in the REH community before proceeding any further with that, though, as I know that others there have already done quite a bit of work down that path.

Apologies for my absence these days, this below is the reason.

I do look forward to the maya jungle biome being fixed so we can use it for randomly generated maps like unknown. In the meantime to justify using the indian tropic i've imagined some maya city state overdosing on caocao, getting kicked out the peninsula and deciding to sail across the pacific somehow and impossibly smashing their way through with some canoes and landing in India. Because they are so high on caffeine they label it the 'Yucatan', and incidentally anger the Mauryas.

Is there a way to easily change a units size in a mod? In bfme2 modding all you have to do is add: scale =2.0 to double a units size. That would be nice for a mythology mod, for making giants, great eagles, etc.

By the way, maybe the use of metallic scales is not proven but this armor could be used for a hero like Brennus or Viridomarus. This is plausible that a Celt in Italy could have such.

On a related note, I think this can also be a problem. I think an easy fix here is to make all possible current units actually available. So I would make champs, especially inf, more accessible. My first step would be to eliminate the unlocking requirement in barracks Honestly, I think it’s the level of game you play. It’s not the easiest thing for beginners to do. If you want to see what I am referencing, I would suggest watching some high level games, especially 1v1s

So you have no problem with all-in "chicken rush" gameplay? I guess it is fine in 1v1s which I understand is where your exerience lies. I guess you would expect something like this and prepare some infantry/cav or maybe other preparation already like @Feldfeld said. So OP. However, in a TG, doing a chicken rush is usually a toxic way to put someone out of the game. It's nearly impossible to recover from if you set up for a "greedy" boom. Even when you instead try to make infantry, these units are at best equal in number to cav which is not enough to defeat them. Maybe a better approach to this would be to half the number of chickens instead. But still the cav dominance remains (early game, mid game, late game). Skilled players use cavalry's mobility to win while anyone can use their inherent advantages over inf to simply supplant skirmishers in the late game. This is seen all the time, and I think its not ideal gameplay. The patch as written would maintain the mobility advantage of cav while limiting the plain advantage over infantry. If you would rather we keep it how it is, I'll just forget about the branch. if you would like something changed about it, suggest.

Else perhaps lower rated players could take some reference on how to beat the chicken strategy. From my experience, the best way on how to play against it is scouting it, then if there are more cav coming than you can fight, just take all woodcutters back to the CC to take straggler trees. You should have still a way better eco than your opponent so then you can build numbers of men who can fight, and go out when ready. Counterattacking can also be effective in that situation although it requires some technique.

Fully agree to putting this information (mod/map installation) into the FAQ - dupllication of information is dangerous as it could lead to inconsistencies. Just wanted to point out what new users are fighting with (looking through the forum with so many different maps and mods and not knowing how to install). Best regards, Grautvornix

I have not seen evidence of cav domination in 1v1s. My first 3 games against ValihrAnt this alpha were victories from me after he committed to making more cavalry than me, resulting in myself having eco advantage. I played 3 games against vinme where he was trying to make a point about hunt biomes supposedly forcing games to be about making more and more cav, only for me to win by making (way) fewer cav and focusing on defense. Of all 1v1s I played this alpha, I only ever lost once to an opponent making a lot of cav early on, and that only was because I was taken by surprise from my own mistake.

Erm, Windows 7 SP something is the minimum requirement.

looks good to me.

To simulate bees there should be particles. Empire Earth Minute 3:12 (Representation of malaria looks like a swarm of bees).

is not enough in all cases. for example in the case of the Ram siege. It is not something that has a favorable opinion, but it is not related to the patch. I just think rams should work differently.

That's a good point. While I think we can test some gameplay things the mod still needs to be fun to play, which is the primary reason for it being as popular as it is, and that is what gives us good feedback and good voting.

Well currently, the reason all in "chicken" rushes are so effective is because a small number of cav can pretty easily beat a larger group of infantry and because you can get the extra food required for cav very fast. Instead, success in these rushes should be earned by the skill of the player, so thats why the cav have less HP. The use case of the unit should really be its mobility, not because of its innate strength compared to infantry. Don't get me wrong, cavalry will still be stronger than infantry (because they can't gather every res) but they will be less tanky, less forgiving when mistakes happen like running into spearmen. The expectation I have is that you could instead see aggression with infantry as well, which would be more interesting. Currently you only see this if two players are very close. I imagine we will play version three for at least a month. I just put those out there so you guys can give feedback to me, so I might change things.

Considering the following feedback and my own opinion gathered thereafter, the question about the mods seems to be not applicable anymore. Yes, that was also my first thought. Whereas DLing mods from within the game would certainly be profit from an amended GUI etc., experimenting with mods by manually downloading them is out of scope when looking at it from in-game experience. @Grautvornix There is already an in-game link to the Wiki with instructions about modding: => => => https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Modding_Guide I would like to not elaborate further about instructions that are available in the Wiki and FAQs but focus on providing links to the respective OS as a very basic help (not more). And instead of providing lots of text in this extra in-game window, just a small window with different buttons for the different OS might suffice that lead to the corresponding Wiki sub-section. Thus, we would also avoid creating unnecessary work for keeping in-game text and Wiki text in sync.

@all This is a test and obviously work in progress. E.g., the buttons need to be adjusted and content be completed. Maybe the whole window needs some amendments, too. Please let me know if this is useful at all and what you would like to have amended/added/etc. Thank you!

Bring the effects of geographical features to production? E.g. as for the production rate of fields, fertile land and rivers increase it, while barren land and desert decrease it; as for the prices in corral and stable, grassland decreases them, desert increases them. In addition, weather system? E.g. Rainy weather decreases moving speed and projectile accuracy, foggy weather decreases unit sights and projectile accuracy, sandstorm weather decreases unit sights, moving speed, projectile accuracy as well as all productions.

I like how Duileoga and Lopess chose the protoclassic period, as 0 A.D. straddles between 500 B.C.E (Empires Ascendant) and 500 C.E. (later planned civs for that time period) meaning the maya can face civs from both time periods which you can make a few somewhat logical alt history fantasy scenarios with

I wonder why there are no buildable bridges.

@Mr.lieStan is away for a conference for the next few weeks. You might as well get a head start on the licensing requirements by following the instructions here. You can also post a statement here that you agree to license the work that you publish to WFG repositories and forum. Copy/paste the form from another user's post into your own post.

I would say drop the third option of "no opinion" as its not at all helpful for decision making. A straight yes or no is all that is necessary.