Pedro Falcão

At least in all games with task queues I've played, the workers finish their current task before following the queue. The logic is that if you are holding shift (the key to queue), then you want to finish the current order, first.

Well, what is expected is for each of them to finish their current task (if you told them to gather something, they'll gather until they're full, deliver it to a dropsite and then proceed to the next task) and then proceed to the next task, following their own queue. Why would you want one to wait for the others? From my point of view, the sooner they start to build, the better, isn't it?

Well, actually, RoN has Food, Timber, Metal, Gold, Oil and Knowledge, 6 resources. The difference is that the resource spots didn't dwindle.

I've been brainstorming these ideas for the last few days. I thought to post this in the "Suggestions for 0 A.D." topic, but i thought it would be cleaner to create a new topic, since it is a long post and i'm attaching illustrations. 1 - Smart Passive Units Priority: Can live without, but would be nice to have Nature: Not so cool micro-managing Short Description: Put passive units behind the aggressive ones. Detailed Description: Have you seen what happens when you select that whole mass of units (including medics) and command them to attack something? The medics walk to the position of the target, and since they are always focused, they become an easy target, you have to manually hold them back or select them separately, wasting your precious time right in the heat of a battle. Suggestion: Make the passive units (those that don't have any attacks / won't be used as warriors) stay behind everybody, no matter what formation they are (of course, with the exception of box formation). 2 - Smart Training Queue & Visible training queue Priority: Needed! Nature: To save time Short Description: Make the training queues visible under the building portraits and distribute evenly the training orders between the selected buildings. Detailed Description: I used to build a lot of Barracks/Archery Ranges/Stables/Castles, in AoK, to make unit training much faster. When i tried to select a bunch of them and order to fill all their queues with that unit, only one of the buildings would receive the orders, and i had to manually select each other one and make them train, wasting my precious time. Plus, to see if the queue was full in one of the building i had clicked, i used to need to click on each building and check it out manually. Suggestion: It would be nice to have training queues visible like this: Blue: Available units Red: Buildings + visible training queues Yellow: Barracks Green: Attached facilities I then spam clicks on the Mauraders' portrait, ordering the 4 barracks to train Mauraders, units that can only be built with an specific attached facility type. Note that only the two barracks with the needed facility answer to my command. Now, i order the barracks to train 10 Marines, the basic units that any barracks can train. Note that i only ordered the 4 barracks to train 10 marines and the game took care of dividing my 10 marines in all of the available barracks. 3 - Flying Units' Ground Position Priority: For mods, only. Nature: For better accuracy Short Description: A marker on the ground to show where exactly the unit is hovering above. Detailed Description: For strategic purposes, i'd like to see where, on the ground, that flying unit is. Only with a marker i can see, with accuracy, if the unit is within range of an AA Battery or not. Example Screenshots: 4 - Attack-move Command Priority: I can live without, but would be nice to have! Nature: Not so cool micro-managing Short Description: A command to move to the target location, but attacking every enemy on their path Detailed Description: Sometimes, even more against AI, i need the units to attack something as soon as they acquire range. I know the thing is there, but the fog-of-war doesn't let me see it, so i have to go there manually, make units stop when they're in range, select those that aren't in range, make them come closer. Suggestion: This is an unnecessary and annoying thing we could prevent with the Attack-move command. You click the icon of this command, click where you want the units to go and they'll automatically go there, but attacking everything on sight, and then resuming the walk. 5 - Show/Select Weapon Types Priority: Needs to be better thought of. Nature: To save time Short Description: A shortcut to select units by weapon type. Detailed Description: Remember those situations when there are so many units on the screen that you can't even seem to find your archers to call them back before the enemies reach them? You know they are there, but you can't find them on such a mess (corpses on the ground, rubble everywhere, soldiers of different colors but with similar clothes... Or different clothes for the same kind of unit), wouldn't it be better to rapidly select them all and bring them to safety? Solution: The player could be able to drag X unit's weapon to a button (similar to groups of control), so that you can easily drag your archers to safety without messing with your groups of control. I apologize for the long post, i tried to make it both complete and pleasing to read. I'd also appreciate deeply other opinions/better ideas on these matters.

I'm afraid you'll have to get your hands dirty with C++. In another thread i can't remember which, it was discussed about realistic physics in the game, but since it would only make the game run even slower for a not-so-fun and not-so-useful feature, the idea's been put aside, at least for now.

Played just now the Alpha 12 and it seems the Persian Palace seems to be without rubble.

Hello, nixof. I'm sorry, but the game is currently not supporting translations, yet. As the game is still in alpha stage and many things are constantly being changed, the team thought it would be a better idea to offer translation options only later, around beta stage. Have a nice day!

At long last!

I can't say for sure because i don't really notice much, too, but i found only 'bug' or 'improvement' tickets on trac related to formations. Well, the team is improving the position of the units inside a formation (along with the pathfinder) and i'm almost sure we don't have bonus damage for attacking from behind, yet, but i think the bonuses of the formations is already there. Can someone from the team clarify this for us, please?

Thanks, Michael.

I think the buff is already there. See Mythos_Ruler's post on formations for more info.

If possible, it would be cool to have a way for campaign missions to interact between themselves. A way to store info, i.e. I made a mission in which you had to make 10 soldiers through a mountain passage, no buildings, no training. The mission after, i'd want to keep the exact same number of soldiers and their health.

When we talk about triggers, what (basically) comes to my mind is the possibility to make a certain scenario follow a script, through if/then/else cases. You'll call me dumb if it's not what you mean, but what i understood from your post is this. If true, then i must agree that it's not a small task, but as i envision it, it's not that big either. BTW, thanks for the good will, zoot.

I'm sorry, but i don't see this poisoning/sabotaging as a funny thing. It would be an interesting thing to test, but i think it'd add a whole new level of micro-managing and distractions for the player and coming back when your army is already down isn't a funny thing, imo.

Steps to make a Total War campaign (roughly): - Set the start date/turn and the end date/turn. - Build the overall map - Program the game to make it affect the map according to the outcome of the battles (probably the most time consuming) - Script a handful of special events (e.g. discovery of the iron: players can now make units that use iron weapons/armor) - Build the scenarios of the battles Steps to make a Narrative campaign (roughly): - Choose the story carefully and what moments will be depicted (maybe make a storyboard?) - Create the dialogues and missions - Create the scenarios - Introduce the missions/dialogues/cinematics to the scenarios and adapt them to the comfort/fun of the player (probably the most time consuming) Note that most likely, both will use triggers. At least to make campaigns like RoN's ones, you'd need triggers.

Well, with a good trigger system, anyone can make campaigns. If we look through this forum, there are already many ready to contribute with campaigns, scenarios, the team will only have to decide if/which of them will be included within the game.

I always loved Warcraft 3 TFT's world editor because it was really powerful and easy to learn. The ability to change unit names, stats, model, responses, weapon type, moving speed, abilities, nature (flesh/mechanic/magic/ethereal), etc. with but a click was an amazing achievement for many people and the why even today the game lives on with DotA (which second version is coming soon, to retire the War3's one) and other custom maps. BTW Starcraft 2 brings an even more powerful editor, but considerably harder to learn, too.

And i trying to read it with (the little) i know of Indian accent... Silly me...

I say the territory itself can be used for both turtling and applying pressure to the enemy, but it adds some time/resource cost to lessen the super-aggressiveness of building a bunch of barracks right outside the enemy base, that's ridiculously unfair and inaccurate as our mate Chumply pointed. Still, you can take vital resource spots and/or defend yourself with almost no troops (with attrition damage).

Maybe if the spy had an ability to temporarily hide even from outposts, or if outposts had a detection range smaller than the LoS...

I've played it once. Dude, it's really a lot of fun. FFA is funny, if you don't have a team that knows what they're doing, but team vs. team is much better.

Primeiro Tuga que eu vejo por aqui! Seja bem vindo! Does your 'Coelho' means 'rabbit' too?

Dude, If you get around doing it, i'm sure no one will complain, why would they? I like to see things changing visually when i upgrade them, it gives me the feel that i really advanced.

I'd normally agree with you, oshron, but i've already thought of this and i'm counting with the possibility of the player abusing of these detectors. For heroes, it's ok, they are unique. But champion units are less common early, and then the player could just have 10 of them patrolling the base streets to prevent any spies and have a control group set on them to fastly get them to counter any massive attack as needed. About Outposts i'd agree, also, but still the player can intentionally build outposts next to base entrances so that any spies are killed on spot. For fortresses, it's the same, though i bet the team will make restrictions for how close to other fortresses/civ centres one can build a fortress. In Starcraft 2, for example, the Protoss race has only 2 kinds of detectors: The Photon Cannons (their guard towers) and the Observers (an invisible flying unit meant only to spy). Spamming any of these is a dumb thing to do because you'll be wasting resources your opponent will not, and yet, not having any is as dumb as spamming, cause your opponent could take advantage of that and get invisible units to destroy your whole resource production and then your army (yes, SC2's emphasis is on controlling resource spots). But this system can't be applied to 0 A.D. for 3 reasons: 1 - Buildings are harder, and thus slower, to destroy, making the tactic of "destroy the detector for the spy to come in" a bit of a fail, it would only drive the enemy's attention to that spot(while in SC2, when the enemy sees it, the spy is already in and will hardly be spotted). 2 - Resources aren't as precious here as they are in SC2, where even buildings have an optimized order of construction to save time/resources, thus it wouldn't matter much if you spam outposts to detect spies. 3 - In SC2, information is the key to winning, you must always send spies to scout and see what you'll need to build/train next. The longer your enemy stays hidden, the greater his chances of winning. This is not true, at least not yet, for 0 A.D., where the size of the army and the positioning of the fight are more important to win.

I seriously don't think it matters, since we'll be able to play it anyways the whole time. The only difference is that the game receives the title of "complete". This is what i think.