Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 2021-12-18 in all areas

  1. Hello everyone, We're happy to release the first testing bundle of 0 A.D. Alpha 26 (name to come). Keep in mind, this is not a 'Release Candidate' yet, and so some bugs are to be expected. We provide this in the hope of finding and squashing them efficiently. If you choose to test, please keep that in mind. Downloads - Current bundles are for SVN revision r26108 (See below for updated bundles) Linux data and build macOS Windows Snap build is available at latest/edge Things to note: Translations are not complete & may be buggy -> Play in English for now. Mind your mods -> they might introduce issues or Out Of Sync. Save your A25 config file somewhere, ideally. Changes: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Alpha26 Points of attention: Acceleration Currently known issues: AI is slower to attack https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4391 Maurya palace triggers errors https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4392 Gui scale popup might close quickly https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4318 What to do if I have an error or notice something weird? Post your commands.txt (replay) and the interestinglog.html file from your folder. You can also reply to this thread. What to do if the game crashes Update your crashlog.dmp and crashlog.txt see https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/GameDataPaths What to do if I have an Out Of Sync? You should go in your logs folder, find the replay (commands.txt at least), the mainlog/interestinglog and find the OOS dump folder. Zip all these files and upload them here. Ideally, you should coordinate with the OOS players so that they upload their own OOS dump, so we can compare them. Things you may want to test (non-exhaustive) Launch a random game Launch a skirmish. Connect to the lobby Play on the lobby with someone Launch Atlas and try things out there Open Unit tests demo (To see if there any breakage in displaying entity's) (It's in scenarios) Enable feedback and see if it works (Main menu) Example video Connect to and use mod.io ( Try to download and install the linux libertine font) Test replaying new games Test Screenshots (F2) Test Big Screenshots (Maj+F2) Test hotkeys Test Saving and loading a game. Test Quickload/Quicksave And of course playing games.
    9 points
  2. Some screens from the current build: https://github.com/stereotipo/millenniumad
    9 points
  3. Hello people!! Happy new year everyone! I hope y'all had some nice holidays.. here it's been a bit of a mess getting sick for a couple of weeks. I took advantage of the circumstances to advance a bit with this little project. I wanted to share some advancements with you all so I made this little bullshit promo image ahahaha - Anyway some changes have revolved around a restyle of the current civs and now I finally tackled the new one the Rus which is already quite playable! - I tried to introduce also some little game mechanic variations, like a couple of buildings in the roast when necessary and some alternative techs for some civs. Nothing extraordinary, but maybe it could be a bit of an experiment for features in the Vanilla About the assets: - Music have been sourced here: https://pixabay.com/%2Fsv/music/ and https://archive.org - Textures have been sourced here: https://www.textures.com/ which is a pretty good repository for assets that can be used for game production and similar (it clearly states in the terms that: "You are allowed to use our photos for many kinds of projects and even sell them in combination with 3D models.") - The rest of art / 3d models and illustrations have been made by me (aaand the previous people that worked on it obv). So is 100% free stuff The game still need some polishing but I feel like it's getting to a nice advanced stage, so guys I would be happy if some of you want to try it out and share some feedbacks. The game can be downloaded here: https://github.com/stereotipo/millenniumad
    8 points
  4. Hi everyone just came to say hi, and to share some Pictures of the Empires At war Rise of Rome 0AD Scenario that I have been working on for almost a year... Just have some talks with Lopess, a Brazilian moder, I meet at this forum. to join forces and make this scenario a Solid 0 AD Game scenario for all you guys to enjoy and play, or modified as you like, with the Roman Republic as the main protagonist, and it's chronological history of conquest and expansion across the whole Mediterranean Sea and Central Europe. Here, I'm sharing some pictures with some remarks, so you all can get an Idea of how it is coming so far. Share your ideas and opinions, all criticism, good or bad are welcome, specially suggestions...and thanks for sharing. Remarks are in Spanish, so to those That don't speak Spanish, I'm sorry guys... But that is the language I used to communicate with Lopess who speak Portuguese, too...and I send pictures to him first and now I'm sharing them here...but you guys get the idea... Peace and prosperity be with you all. Thanks for sharing, guys.
    8 points
  5. First I would like to offer the disclaimer that an emphasis on balance is not a bad thing. It helps to maintain a thriving community, and the community is integral to an open source topic. That said, many design decisions that have changed the game on an integral level were done so with balance in mind, not an end vision. Again, this is not bad either, but ultimately it means that many of 0 AD's design choices are near sighted and balanced =/= good design. Ultimately a problem I see with the game from this standpoint is that the factions are fairly bland. Yes, there are restrictions to what units are available, but at the end of the day a Persian spearman has the same statline most other factions. Many great proposals have been done to flesh them out better. I would particularly mention wowgetoffyourcellphone's and my own, but I'm sure that there are plenty of others. Despite often a great amount of thought being put into them and at least some of the community having positive opinions on the alterations, to my knowledge little if anything gets done. This is ultimately motivated by the fact that these would throw the balance in flux. While this is exasperating to people who would like change, the points behind these conservatives are valid. The multiplayer community might suffer. That said, I think that there is a reasonable compromise that 0 AD can and should take to help diversify factions and gameplay for the longterm without ruining the competitive scene. One by one factions could experience overhauls with key things in mind: How would their economy function differently from other ones? Are there any ways to reward strategic building placement? Are there any glaring inaccuracies in the design? What are current strategies used in the competitive scene, and how could these be expanded upon? These new iterations of the factions would initially be an option until all factions have experienced an overhaul, allowing for players to freely choose between the current, more balanced faction designs and the more experimental ones. Then, the team could in theory even turn around and continue the cycle of overhauls.
    7 points
  6. Wildfire Games would like to thank to all the members of this awesome community and thank you for the continued support and patience. To continue spreading the word about 0 A.D. we designed those two best wishes cards, you can find the XCF template at the bottom for printing. card-templates.zip
    7 points
  7. I am just trying to copy this from https://www.moddb.com/mods/hyrule-conquest/news/the-node-system Details on one of the largest additions to how maps are designed and work in Hyrule Conquest. Posted by The_Undying_Nephalim on Dec 13th, 2021 For some time there have been whispers of some fundamental changes to how maps work in Hyrule Conquest. We kept these ideas off to the side while we spent eight months updating Hyrule Conquest to the 0.25 version of 0AD. Now that everything has finally been ported over, our map changes had come up again and we had quite a discussion on how to implement them. We really went all in. So I present to you today one of the biggest and most exciting changes I've been looking forward to. The Node System It should be obvious that over the last several years, Hyrule Conquest has slowly but surely been shifting away from 0AD's style of gameplay and morphing more and more into a Battle for Middle Earth inspired game. Adding in Battalions was the first big move in this direction, and now we are taking another big leap and fully adopting BFME's map design and Node based system. There are several key reasons why we are doing this (other then mine and Exodarion's love for BFME as a game): 1. Lack of many worker battalions will greatly help the game's performance 2. Map design becomes much easier and less chaotic, with the map divided into dedicated nodes it becomes easier to make great "set pieces" that the action takes place around. 3. Our planned Minor Faction system (something I'm even more excited about!) depends heavily on dividing the map up into Nodes So What's changing? The first and most obvious thing that players will notice is that maps are divided up into a series of "Nodes". There are many different types of nodes the player can capture, and each type will allow the player to build different structures and provide the player with different options and resources. To compensate for this system, bases will be entirely linked to Nodes and structures will be built on plots that spawn around captured Nodes. Resource collections will now be completely automated and based on what resources exist within the Node's perimeter. For example, if you capture a node that has three Berry Bushes and a Rupee Deposit, once you have set up your base these bushes and Rupees will begin to drain automatically and added into your coffers. If you have played Battle For Middle Earth, Rise of Legends, or Halo Wars, you'll have some idea of what I'm talking about. -The Hylians capture an Outpost Node and transform it into a happy little base- As you might have guessed after reading the first point, Workers as a unit are no longer viable with this system since buildings are based on Plots that spawn around Nodes and Resources are automatically drained within your captured Nodes. Workers will become purely visual as a worker will begin gathering the resources that your Nodes are draining. With the way bases work now many other awesome non-controlled units will be seen walking around your bases doing stuff such as civilians going to your marketplaces and children playing with each other in the streets. -Even Children will play in the streets of your bases- This method of dividing up maps will create a noticeable ebb and flow to a match where players move their armies and expand, allowing for the creation of "set pieces" around each node to give areas of the map something visually recognizable. It generally makes the design and creation of maps easier and will also help out with randomly generated maps down the road. - Some examples of map blueprints with the Node system - Let's take a look at the Node System in more detail and see what you can capture. Settlement Node There is only one Settlement Node per player on a map, and it's always the Node that you start out with. This large area contains some of each resource to get you started, and plenty of building slots to start construction (Most factions will have 7 buildings plots). Depending on what faction you pick, these nodes may also start with walls and tower defenses around them. Outpost Node The primary means of expanding your base, capturing an outpost will allow you to build a smaller secondary and tertiary base, assuming you can capture more than one. Most factions are provided with five building plots when they capture an Outpost node, and may also have walls depending on your faction of choice. Like the Settlement Node, Outpost Nodes often have multiple resources on them making them very valuable locations to fight over. Camp Node Very small expansions, Camp Nodes let you set up tiny bases. For most factions they will provide three building plots. Camps do not come with Walls, though there are some exceptions. While nowhere near as valuable as an Outpost or Settlement, Camps still often contain multiple resource types and are thus worth capturing and holding. Camps are also the only Nodes that you can construct your chosen Minor Factions' bases on. Resource Node A small node that can be captured and provides you with one slot to construct a resource building. Resource Nodes often contain just a single type of resource (Such as Lumber). While Outpost and Camps are the most tempting targets, Resource Nodes will absolutely be the main means of expanding your economy. Once resources have been completely drained from these nodes, players can convert the resource building into Houses to increase their population caps. Some other factions will also have additional options of what they can build on these nodes, such as Mercenary camps. Small and Large Ruins Rupees are an extremely rare resource out in the wild, thus capturing Ruins and unearthing their treasure is the primary means of collecting Rupees. Ruins will be absolutely critical to take and hold, as they are the main source of Rupees and the only reliable source of them. Ruins will come in two sizes, the small providing only a few Rupees per second and the Large providing many. Unlike other Nodes, most factions cannot build anything on or near Ruins. Some factions however, such as the Darknuts, can actually convert Ruins into brand new bases (Large Ruins function much like an Outpost for them and Small Ruins like a Camp). Other factions (such as the Stalfos) completely rely on using Ruins to construct their bases instead of the normal nodes. Wonder Node Usually found at the center of a map, these nodes are the only location a player can construct their Wonder. Just as often a large and terrifying Boss might be found guarding this node and must be killed first before it can be captured. Capturing this node will allow you to construct a new base with many defenses around it as you begin construction on your imposing Wonder. That is a general overview for how maps will be designed and how the Nodes on these maps will work. This is a very broad and generalized summary of the topic, the particular nuances of how each faction interacts with nodes will not all be exactly alike. I already gave examples of how Darknuts and Stalfos break the rules with this system, and there are some many interesting ways other factions will have interplay with Nodes (I'm looking at you, Moblins...) There are many other awesome features linked to this new change, such as Wildlife Lairs and the previously mentioned Minor Faction system. However I will save those for another article in the future. - Juicy Minor Faction details will have to wait... -
    7 points
  8. Just adding the official 0AD Newbie Rush edition of @Yekaterina's guide here; Download link below Massive thanks to @Yekaterina for allowing me to produce the official tie-in version, I've no doubt it's going to be popular and look forward to reading future, updated editions (not least because I'm so bad at the game myself and need all the help I can get!) From_nub_to_OP_Dec2021.pdf
    7 points
  9. Here it is: https://hyiltiz.github.io/0ad-unit-analysis/ It shows 3 tables: - a table for all template units that shows the specs of a generic unit, e.g. a Cav Archer; - a table for Civ specific changes from the generic template unit; - a table for unit availability for all generic template units for each of the Civs Let me know if you have any specific ideas for improvements, preferably at #0ad-dev but I might check back here too. PRs are very welcome too! Story I wanted to work on something like this, and @Stan pointed out to me in #0ad that there is already a script in the repo at ./source/tools/templatesanalyzer/unitTables.py. Unfortunately, the script hasn't been updated substantly since 2014 and the script simply threw an error when I tried to run on the latest version of the game (A26, more specifically, the trunk r26182). I forked the directory so I can keep my commits small and with a specific theme to facilitate merge and auditing, as well as to publish it in Github so anyone can view it online without having to deal with SVN, HTML, JS, Python etc. As such, note that the majority of the program logic, design and program is NOT my own; it is based on previous work of fatherbush, Itms, scythetwir, wraitii and others(?). I will be trying to getting this merged into 0ad main repo soon. The idea of Mixins (like unit tags, e.g. hoplites who can use Phalanx formation) were introduced since this script was originally written, and currently I have not found a good way to represent them as part of the table, except just listing these Mixin tags as a list in a separate column. But that would be barely useful, so Mixin types are omitted at the moment.
    6 points
  10. Link Github mod https://github.com/wltonlopes/mayas_protoclassic
    6 points
  11. Back for the first Sunday game of 2022! Replay download below SG.72 4v4 Don't Poke the Bear.zip
    6 points
  12. Alistair Findlay RANTING ABOUT 0 A.D. !!!
    6 points
  13. If you look at the forum history, the people who were loudest about the a24 being imbalanced were the same people who said a24 was bland and uniform louder than anyone else and they did so from the very start. If anything, it was the casual players who received a24 best, but that also came to pass and I am not here trying to point fingers. And if you look at the ongoing conversations in the balancing community, most concern how we can (re)introduce aspects of the game that lost in a24 or have never been developed. For example, look at the threads @wowgetoffyourcellphone posted where he and I had several productive conversations that hopefully will materialize into new, balanced features that will make everyone happy. Saying "people who care about balance make the game boring" is wrong and unproductive. People who care about balance can also care about it being interesting, fun, and dynamic. People who care about balance simply want new features to be balanced in addition to being new.
    6 points
  14. The forum is great for discussion, but not great for action. Action is creating a mod for others to try and/or a patch to put on Phabricator for others to try and improve and eventually be accepted and committed. Lately, I have been attempting the latter, with good results: [Gameplay] - Garrison Domestic Animals into the Corral to get a <ResourceTrickle> of Food https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4380 [Gameplay, CivBonus] Rework Kushite Pyramids to be Phase Requirements https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4381 The discussions there are far more fruitful, due to there being actual stats and real gameplay to chew over. The forum is really only good for hypothetical discussion.
    6 points
  15. First, I would like to praise the 0 AD team for making a great engine, as well as for making it so accessible to modders. The vanilla game is very enjoyable, the music is great, even if the AI nearly always massacres my towns. Also the use of JavaScript is a great choice, as I use it recently a lot in my work, so I don't have the bad feeling of playing too much... But I have to admit, being no real fan of AoE series, the game was attractive for me for the modding options. There were no wizards and dragons, so I thought about making some for the game - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hqaAKNebBjikWZtog9-GRmMbbYmwbWPC/view?usp=sharing The mod basically adds a new faction of "Scytho-Slavs", which are very roughly based on 6th c. Sclaveni, as they are described by Byzantine authors, but the name is from Leake 1814 (recently deleted from archive.org ), so the fantasy aspect is more important - from rhomphaias and bronze armors to dragons and thunderbolts. I was even thinking about making Red Sonja the faction's main hero. In short, as a "civilization", they are somewhat simplified: units can be trained only in the central building and the fortress. There are no barracks, no stables (cavalry needs the Corral), no "female citizen" unit (all units choose a gender variant randomly at training). On the other hand, basic infantry is cheaper than most units in vanilla and trains slightly faster. Units can also be healed in houses (3 at a time) from the beginning. The mod is far from being finished, but I wanted to ask for advice about some features. 1. Instead of temples, the faction can build an idol: a wooden statue of a god. As in Age of Mythology, the player has to choose one: Peraunu or Welinˀsu, which provide units with different upgrades. The idol decays in time, but can be repaired by a shaman (the healer/magician unit) dancing around. The decay is provided by a global aura, which is "researched" automatically when an idol is built. Even if there is a limit of one idol per player, the aura destroys any subsequent idol, if the first is lost. Is it thus possible to "unresearch" it or otherwise deactivate a global aura? 2. One of the functions of both idol and its shaman is to serve as a drop-off point for a new resource called "skulls". I got an inspiration for this new functionality from an older game called Sacrifice, where you collect souls of defeated enemies to strengthen yourself. Defeated enemy combat units have a chance to drop an "intact skull", which can be gathered by your units and brought to the shaman or idol. Only skulls from enemies (technically, the dropped skull is an entity granted to the player, who killed the unit) can be collected. The skulls can be used to upgrade your units, e.g. with rhomphaias or dragons (btw, now you need a fully trained Champion and 30 skulls for one). The problem is the gathering itself: to prevent combat formations from running away from battle, I set the scripts so, that only one skull is gathered at once. Also, for some reason, the units are unable to find nearby skulls dropped by dead enemies for gathering. Why does the gathering AI ignore them? 3. Concerning the dragons: presently, it is rather unwieldy to control them, they land and take off again each time a new target is selected, they don't always correctly face their targets, and can use only a melee attack. The flying script is somewhat hard to follow, and it somehow overrides attack AI of the unit. Is it possible to set up a simpler flying motion using the UnitMotion component? Or at least without the circling around coded for the P-51? 4. Another solution for the dragon problem would be to make it a "packing" unit: it could have a walking mode, in which it would use a melee attack, and a flying/floating mode, in which it would throw down flames. The problem was, that packing uses a new entity, so a new visual is generated. This affects only the rider, which is small anyway, but I plan to add more variation to the mount too. Is it possible to use the packing feature and preserve entity visuals? 5. There is also a horse archer upgrade, available to Raiders with the Peraunu idol. As I looked for a way, how to make them capable of shooting on the move, I made them to contain two entities, i.e. a horse with a dummy attack and a "turret". Visually, it is not ideal, as the 1. prop did not place the turret entity correctly unless it was parented to root, and 2. it dies separately from the horse. As I saw that some nomadic factions are in making, are there any more elegant solutions for such a feature? Thanks for any advice, and feel free to try the mod if you wish.
    5 points
  16. I don't think the balancing needs to be that deep. In addition, the balance should not encroach more than necessary on design and creation.
    5 points
  17. So, I implemented a huge change to heroes many months ago. While I've made a lot of progress, there still remains a lot to be done. Essentially, the player chooses a Hero at the start of the match, and this hero is your civ's leader for the remainder of the match. You can retrain this hero 5 times throughout the match if they are killed. And this Hero's cost increases for each passing Phase. All heroes have these 3 auras standard: "Forced Labor" Nearby Builders construct buildings +10% faster "Supply Lines" Nearby Gatherers +10% gathering rate for all resources "Stalwart Defense" When garrisoned in a Structure or Siege Weapon, the hero gives it a bonus of +2 capture recovery rate Each Hero has his or her own special bonuses and auras. Sample: Hero Aura or Bonus 1 Usually something combat related Aura or Bonus 2 Usually economically related or some kind of other bonus; sometimes a secondary combat aura or bonus Special Technology Selecting this hero unlocks a special technology that is usually related to the hero in some way Upgrade to Mount (or other special state) This is usually unlocked in City Phase Mounts have greater speed, trample aura, extra health, etc. Horse Elephant Chariot ======================================================================= Hero Selection Samples:
    5 points
  18. Free version - only with metal, to activate gold you need to purchase Deluxe Edition of 0 A.D.
    5 points
  19. Hi, dropping something a BAR friend made for 0ad (Floris): Hope you like it :-)
    5 points
  20. I think this is what most people want. Attack move just targets the nearest unit, so why can't we have something where we just attack units within an area. This would be similar to how towers and defensive structures work. But more to the point, is there any downside here? Players don't have to use it if they don't like. The only downside I can see is that it decreases micro, which many would see as upside and is irrelevant in large group battles.
    5 points
  21. 3.1.3 version is out now, updated original download links (zip | pyromod). Added mod info buttons in the main menu and the in-game menu, explaining the changes that the mod brings. Mainly useful for people that use the in-game mod downloader because they will never see a read me otherwise. fixed. Mod credits have been integrated into the main menu credits.
    5 points
  22. I remember playing ptols in a23 and thinking that we need to make the civs each be as distinct as ptol was from other civs. Instead the opposite happened and ptol was made more the same as the others.
    5 points
  23. Here I would like to create a list of things that need to be rebalanced. If you feel something needs to be added, post it here and I add it. If you support a claim, I will add your name to that topic. In this tread I won't discuss things, but rather inventorize opinions. To keep the list concise, I will not mention (all) units specific to factions. Also, there are some generic imbalances (such as Ptolemies) and specific imbalances (such as Ptolemy philopater) and if you mention the generic imbalance you don't need to repeat every generic imbalance that comes with it. So I will start with things that are considered to strong: Sword Cavalry (insert name here) Javelin infantry (LetswaveaBook, Dizika, borg-) Pikemen (Weirdjokes, Dizika) Skiritai (insert name here) Mercenaries (LetswaveaBook) Specifically Sword cavalry mercenaries (Breakfastburrito007, Chrstgtr, Philip the Swaggerless, Dizika) Champion cavalry in general (Insert name here) Roman champion cavalry (LetswaveaBook, Breakfastburrito007, Chrstgtr, Dizika) Iberian champion cavalry (LetswaveaBook, Breakfastburrito007, Chrstgtr, Philip the Swaggerless, Weirdjokes. soloooy0) Iberian skrim cavalry with hero (Dizika) Gallic cavalry champions (Dizika) Priests(Weirdjokes) Ptolemy philopater (Insert name here) Ptolemies (LetswaveaBook, Yekaterina, Philip the Swaggerless) Iberians (LetswaveaBook, Yekaterina) Boudica(Chrstgtr) Camel Archers(Chrstgtr) Things that are considered to weak CS infantry archers (Yekaterina, , Dizika, borg-, soloooy0) CS spear cavalry (Breakfastburrito007, Chrstgtr , Dizika, borg-) Spear cavalry merceneraies(Dizika) Spear Cavalry in general (LetswaveaBook,Breakfastburrito007, Chrstgtr, Philip the Swaggerless, Weirdjokes, Yekatherina,soloooy0) Bolt shooters(Dizika, borg-) Fanatics(Chrstgtr, Philip the Swaggerless, Weirdjokes) All speed/eco only heroes(Chrstgtr) Britons(Dizika) bad heroes (Weirdjokes, soloooy0) Maurya elephant hero(Dizika) Bad team boni(Weirdjokes) Things that need to be reconsidered in general: Damage values of ranged compared to melee (LetswaveaBook,Micfild). Change the hp values of melee units to be the same as (or close to) ranged units (Micfild) Reduce the armor values of Pikemen (Micfild) cost of priests (Dizika, borg-) Introduce an attack group/ground option(Breakfastburrito007, Chrstgtr) Mercenary cost (Chrstgtr, Weirdjokes) Catapults(Dizika,borg-) Athenians(Dizika) Macedonians(Dizika) Roman Military camps(Dizika) wonders(Weirdjokes, philip the swaggerless, chrstgtr) People that have contributed to the list: LetswaveaBook, Micfild, Breakfastburrito007, Yekatherina, Chrstgtr, Philip the Swaggerless, Dizika, borg-.
    4 points
  24. small update to 3.2. featuring a slight transparent main menu, experimental new logo design and other small fixes people mentioned.
    4 points
  25. There has been some discussion about implementing attack ground, and I think we should go ahead and decide if this should be implemented for A26. I have no idea about the implementation process. Currently there seems to remain a need to design a graphic to display for the attack-ground radius, I imagine the mouse scroll wheel and using the existing radius for towers and forts might work fairly well. the graphic would probably only be needed when executing the attack ground command, for example when holding 'A' for a group of ranged units. Perhaps there could also be a hud element for attack ground alongside patrol, garrison, and delete. I think more players are beginning to realize what benefits this could bring to the game. Reasons for Attack-Ground: allow players with ranged units to attack significantly beyond an amount of melee units. "silent nerf" for pikes (as opposed to reducing armor, which would basically make them bad again) "silent buff": for units with higher range (ie archers, which are considered weak, primarily because their range benefits are hampered by their limitation to shooting closer units) Reducing Overkill: Allows players with ranged units to better allocate their damage high pierce units will have even less overkill Overkill seems to be calculation-heavy, might even reduce lag if many players use this. In general: adds more creativity, balance, and skill to fights involving ranged units. Attack ground: id like to test this in more realistic situations to see if it has the benefits I outlined above. Here is a video posted by @Freagarach a few months ago. I could test this with a group if it became a mod. Could I get an idea of how favorable people see this for A26?
    4 points
  26. Hi everyone, I forgot to give building AI to the elephant archers, so here is the updated sauce/book mod. (see next page) While testing has seemed quite positive so far (see my comments above), we need to get more feedback, and I think the best way to do this is setup a large team game. like this if you want to try a TG with the mod, and maybe we should schedule it?
    4 points
  27. I made a mod, where I gave archers buildingAI or tower targetting. In these settings, I set up 15 archers+pikes vs 15 skrimishers+pikes. The side with the archers won(13 archers survived, but there appears significant randomness and sometimes the side with the javelins wins). I also set up 5 archers+pikes vs 5 skrimishers+pikes and this time the side with the skirmishers won narrowly (4 pikemen won with a total HP of 103, but that is only because the archers did not run away after the javelins died). So (1) will shift the balance and it does enough to counter pikemen. Archers+pikes won't be OP, it is just that pikes lose some of their usefulness if they no longer absorb all damage. TemplateModwitharchbuildingAI.zip
    4 points
  28. Here the matches of Letswaveabook vs me Letswaveabook_vs_WeirdJokes.zip
    4 points
  29. Happy New Year to all and thank you again for this great game that you bring to life and evolve
    4 points
  30. Happy New Year everyone Kicking 2022 off with a live recording; Replay files below MD.25_2v2 Battle on the Frozen Lake.zip
    4 points
  31. New Years Eve Epic 5 Player Deathmatch! Was tremendous fun to commentate on this one! And definitely worth checking out the replay files below F4A_03_5 player deathmatch.zip
    4 points
  32. @Carltonus proposed Cassivellaunus (Cassiuellaunos) which is indeed a good candidate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassivellaunus The other mentioned kings are Cingetorix, Carvilius, Taximagulus, Segonax then Mandubratius. But Cassivellaunus is indeed the most interesting choice. For the later period, there is Cartimandua of the Brigantes that could be an interesting figure and Calgacus of the Caledonians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartimandua https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgacus
    4 points
  33. Massive war going on, dude in the down-left corner: "eyy im finna build a house over there"
    4 points
  34. I think the main issue with that, was that it was originally only going to give you different heroes and champions, and that was it. If it were to be designed today, I think the choice would be at the beginning. Leaving it until City Phase makes the "Hellenes" for example feel very generic, until you pick "Macedonians" in City phase and get Pikeman and Spear Cav champions. You lose out on all the Macedonian flavor in the early phases. No Thessalians. No Hypaspist champions. No Thracians. No unique architectural elements. No unique techs (until the very end). It wasn't a bad idea for its time, but we know so much more now about how these factions were unique (specifically militarily, when talking about the Greek civs). The original design had no Seleucids and their awesome War Elephants. The original design had no Ptolemaic Egyptians with their awesome architecture and mix of ethnicities. I could see something where you choose your "Civilization" in game setup. So, "Greeks" for example or "Successor States" or "Romans" or "Celts" or "Nomads", and then when the match starts you get a popup where you choose the "Faction" from that Civilization. So, Greeks -> Athenians, Spartans, Thebans. Successor States -> Macedonians, Seleucids, Ptolemies. Romans -> Republic, Principate, Dominate. Celts -> Gauls, Britons, Celtiberians. Nomads -> Scythians, Xiongnu, Huns. That way, your enemies know what Civilization you chose, but not which Faction until they scout you.
    4 points
  35. I think @psypherium made a good point about that in his video by saying inclusion wouldn't matter if we didn't have any assets for the hans or any of the other civs. We are not considering the yayoi Japan for inclusion because there are barely any assets, Lordgood never released the buildings. Han, Xiongnu, Zapotecs, Scythians have their own assets which make them eligible. The Kushites got in the game that way. In other words we are stripping potential fun away by not including a civilization that's probably more complete than a few of the 13 civs when they got in the game.
    4 points
  36. Mauryas ended who? Kushites what? Spartans are largely a backwater, insular city state, but they're included because they are famous and fun and add diversity. Mauryas included because they are awesome and add diversity, but had zero contact with Rome. Kushites had a few minor border wars with Rome, but are included to add fun and diversity to the civ roster. Han could be included because "If the Chinese and Romans ever fought, who would win?!?!" is a super common what-if scenario people talk about. Plus they add diversity to the roster and the opportunity for new gameplay.
    4 points
  37. Only Corrals allow animals to garrison, so the "sheep garrison into a house making it uncapturable" scenario is moot. Thank you for testing! Simply removing the garrison regen for corrals seems like a simple and elegant solution to me, since only animals can garrison inside. Respectfully, I don't think it's ugly at all. It simply and effectively solves the issue without any kind of far reaching component changes. I think extending or changing the Capturable component or adding new components for capturing is beyond this particular diff.
    4 points
  38. Hey guys, Kate here and right now I have a complete 0AD guide manual that teaches cosmic noobs how to become 1500+ players!! Please suggest improvements!! :)))) From nub to OP.docx
    4 points
  39. Well I really want to prove you wrong Three reasons: Was the only advanced mod (now we got DE and HC) That has been blocking for years, but it's now obsolete Not everything was historically accurate, we're just missing a few things, we got the new bixie by @lastrodamo and now we just need camel anims and some little fixes. Since A24 I wanted to avoid a balancing debacle and or ruin the work that had been done
    4 points
  40. Question for discussion: Why should the "Balance Team" have any say in what features get added to the game? Isn't it their duty to balance the features the team decide to add? That's not to say Balance team members can't participate in gameplay feature discussions. But those are two different roles. You can't come into a gameplay feature discussion and then derail it with constant balance concerns. You have to go into a feature discussion with a mind toward expanding the game's features in good faith. My latest discussions on Phabricator have had a few mentions of balance, but all-in-all have been a fruitful discussion about making the gameplay feature work. The exact statistics can always be decided later through gameplay experience and with input from Balancers. Again, Features and Balance are linked in the end, but they are 2 different things. You add the former, then try to do the latter. If it can't be balanced, then the feature can be removed, but you can't know a feature's balance until it's tried.
    4 points
  41. IMHO this does not qualify as “Feature”. It's an embellishment at best. Features would be a new civilization, bataillons, acceleration, multiple attacks, building sockets (think settlements like Age of Mythology), Knockback, hero selection screen, attack ground, etc. Players who want A23B can still download it and or use nani's mod Disabling defeat sounds is just a a xml file to change. Because it's important there are a bit more sides. - Engine Side Pyrogenesis: Hardware Support, Performance, - Modding and Engine : Features (Both gameplay and hardware such as msaa, 4k support, 64 bits etc) 0 A.D: Empires Ascendant - MP Side: Playability, Balancing, Fun - SP Side: Depth, Diversity etc
    4 points
  42. The big problem is that balancing patches go through the same democratic process as other large patches. We have some patches with a small number of changes (status) that are a few months in the queue waiting to be checked. My suggestion is to create a small team balancing 3-5 players who listen to the community's suggestions, and based on the suggestions, talk and agree on the changes (vote if necessary). After the changes are agreed upon, the patch is built. Ideally, we need a moderator with the main role of balancing patches and gameplay that is more available for this type of patch. This moderator would not exercise his opinion on the patch, he would just test it for possible bugs and code breaks. There have been a lot of good suggestions on the forum over the years on how to work with civilizations, but the process of having to break those patches into dozens of little patches and all being discussed individually doesn't work well, because when you have ideas about changing a civilization, you think about global changes, one patch often depends on the other, and in the current form it's almost impossible to work.
    4 points
  43. You give an extra load on the lobby, because you have to download stuff, and all the clients of the game needs to keep pinging it to know if there are updates. It's possible that it would introduce some security flaw where the person(s) currently having fun ddosing players (and sometimes it seems the server) might inject other fancy stuff. While assuming we have recurrent updates, a mod with team verification on modio with manual download seems much more secure and requires much less infrastructure. Secondary attacks, attack ground, mixed gender citizen soldiers, scouts... probably a lot more. I believe @Freagarach was working on something that could allow directional damage. And because I'm a jolly mood, the hans
    4 points
  44. This is precisely why I proposed working with a new schema, the kill your darlings concept applied to 0 AD. First, while the current alpha is an excellent template to work off of, it does not have to be followed to a T since the first civilisation that would be reworked could be balanced against itself. Things would complicate themselves with each successive rework, but the important thing is that there would be a coherent idea of how each civilisation would perform beyond just looking back at previous versions. At the same time since there would be the option to play the factions prior to the rework, players could still enjoy the variety of them without a grossly imbalanced game. This would allow for much more radical departures from the current formulae. Instead of champions always being available at the 3rd phase simply because, there could be some, like say the Spartans, who could train Spartans at the very outset. There could be new ways of collecting resources like Athenians collecting metal from olive fields.
    4 points
  45. Sorry, that feels like a no-true-scotsman fallacy to me. Yes, everyone wants both balance and new features, but the important distinction is which one you prefer when you can't have both. It seems like this community ends up picking balance over features every time. Perhaps a more useful framing of the problem is that the project's consensus view of what constitutes balance is too narrow for its own good. It's not enough that every strategy has a viable counter; that counter must be tuned to an exacting level of minimal surplus efficiency to preserve the soft counter character of the game. Moreover, you have to do this with consideration to every single civilization in the game. If a new feature makes any one of the game's dozen civilizations grossly over or underpowered then it is automatically not fit for purpose. And forget about trying to deliberately change the nature of any particular strategy or counter relationship, or majorly adjust the unit roster available to any civilization. The community has certain expectations about how things are supposed to look in 0 AD. The problem is, when combining all those constraints the only valid solution is gridlock. With counter margins so finely tuned, every single tiny simulation or stat difference triggers a cascade of unacceptable changes that must be fastidiously counteracted every patch, eating up development energy. Meanwhile, anyone trying to contribute new features has to run a gauntlet of predicting and adjusting for every balance implication across every combination of civs. It is simply not possible to innovate successfully in such an environment. To get out of this rut, this community needs to accept that 1. it is worth breaking things to add features, and 2. that a more bold, rough-strokes approach to balance and counter design will cause less balance problems while the game is in heavy development. Otherwise I think 0AD should accept that its game design has fully matured to its natural conclusion, and slap a beta number on the next update.
    4 points
  46. Huge double episode today!
    4 points
  47. Implement DE's hero choice feature. Done.
    4 points
  48. I will be picky here. It does not mean that many of 0 AD's design choices are near sighted and balanced =/= good design, it only resulted in that many of 0 AD's design choices are near sighted and balanced =/= good design. This wasn't doomed to happen, but it did. I don't think the size of the team is the problem. The main problem is that balance advisors rarely make a differential, or concretely suggest one. Hmmm.... Do you have evidence for that? What is probably closer to the truth is that Balancing team=more imbalances. In my view most inballances that are in A25 are either introduced by the balance changes or they were present in A24 and nobody cared about them. It would have been easy to make a mod that gives players 2 metal mines o mainland, but the balancing team did not push such a mod forward. If such a mod were there, then a number of inbalances would have been solved before we went to A25, but here we are. If you took a look at the scenario editor in A24, you would have seen that skirmishers are good for something, but nobody in A24 could imagine that they were useful. What this community needs is a mentality of complain about it & fix it. It is better to continuously have balance mods being tested rather than having only changes every alpha. If people complain about Roman/Iberian champion cavalry, they are childish. Because if they were smart and really bothered they would make a mod with better balance, nothing is stopping them to mod 0AD. Blaming anyone but the balancing team for imbalances is hypocrite. I like the coral-idea though and I think new features should be not judged on balance. When new things are inbalanced, the balancing team should solve that while keeping the feature intact.
    4 points
  49. Personally the house walling concept is something I dislike; they take away the idea of using other structures for defence like... walls. I think that a soft way of punishing that sort of tactic would be to allow a town phase technology that allows infantry to set buildings on fire. If they are too close together, the fire would spread, but I digress. Walling with buildings is nothing new to RTS games. What we want to think about is ways of providing more nuance. Another thing blacksmith adjacency could do is award experience to units trained from nearby barracks. Honestly there are so many cool, thematic synergies that have remained unexplored that could add some much needed spice to the economic/base building side of the game.
    4 points
×
×
  • Create New...