Tutle

Awesome.

Requirement: -Against Q-bot (very challenging for defensive players) -No building destruction (does not include your own destruction) -Must win match (post the final score) Summary: I beat Q-bot by collect more stone and metal. He eventually ran out of wood, and decided to suicide-rush into my little trap. Fortress: Final Score:

Not sure whether this has been suggested or not, but I think it would be a great additions to the alphas. Cut down on lag is what I hoping it will, as it seems to be what lead to my game getting slower. Maybe in the single player match have a pop-menu appear asking the players what should be the population limit for both sides. Something like this: Population limit (Both sides added together) [ ] Unlimited (May cause lag) [ ] 400 [ ] 300 (Recommended) [ ] 200 [ ] 100 (Quick Match) I would say my PC would benefit from running it on either 300 or 200. Q-Bot stop spamming! lol

Any chance it can be moved to an area where it would be less obtrusive in future release? (by itself)

The big palm tree near the stone rock where the player starts off cannot be cut down. If you move the mouse over it will stay same, and cutting this tree makes a shorter route to the stone in the long run (when you have buildings).

good to know.

Same with Carthaginians Walls & Wall Towers. The towers don't like to be put right next to the walls (needs a small gap to build).

No, this is not a proposal to put recycling businesses in 0 A.D. What I referring to is recycling one's destroyed buildings. Basically, for destroying your own building you get half of the resources you paid for it. The other half is assumed to be destroyed in the demolition. Reason: Sometimes you misplace a building by accident due to mouse lag, or you simply want to improve you're 2nd base that is closer to the enemy. Less work: Destruction automatically adds it to the players' resources. work: players have to press on a different key combination (like crtl+M1) to order their workers to recycle a building. Cool thing about this is that females can be more supportive than just getting resources and repairing, and deal with less risks too.

Would love to play with someone on multiplayer, but I am on Linux. qBot interacts with players a lot, but he is very rude (stop killing my woman first!!).

Alexander. No we are not related.

Wish I would have seen this thread sooner. I am also a defense type of player. I had a super fortress on Oasis V. qBot got so frustrated trying to take the walls down that he just decided to quit. I literally sent my archers for the 1st time to his base, and only had to deal with the scout towers. I will see if I can get another good one built and post it here. By the way, anyone else in this thread obsessive about making city walls align perfectly? or is just me?

Well I'm the kind of commander that prefers to waste resources, instead of wasting units (even in FPS games I would gladly wait for respawn if it means saving a teammate). Also, as Lion pointed out, it's mostly ends up failing when a unit decides to disobey their leader (especially when you're telling them to garrison a wall tower lol). Yeah, that is what I was referring to. It's not worth going after 1 archer shooting you, when there are 6 cavalry soldiers poking you with sticks.

Grr! 5th time in a row I lost a group of elephants because they would not obey my orders to garrison for health. It cost me 3 absolute lose (I couldn't spawn anymore), and 2 base destruction (I rage-quit after seeing all of my units dead). Please fix the attack stances, so at least 1 of them doesn't pose this problem.

I think Violent and aggressive (sword and double sword symbol) stance could use tweaking. I ordered my 2 elephants that were attacking (in aggressive mode) to return back to garrison, so the towers would finish off the enemy range unit (they also had half their health). However, they refused to follow orders and got killed for nothing. I think the reason why they refused to take orders was because they were being hit by arrows from 2-3 enemy archers. Here is some problems I noticed with the stances, and my suggestions on them: Violent (1st one from the right): What it does currently. Suggestion: Also, workers will leave chores to fight nearby enemy units. Will refuse to follow orders if they are being attacked by the enemy. -Players are recommended to use this stance for male workers, and for eliminating enemy forces completely. Aggressive (2nd one from the right): What it does currently. Suggestion: Will follow orders even if they are being attacked by the enemy. -Players are recommended to use this stance for coordinating an attack plan. Passive (middle one): This one is actually fine with me. Although, it would be nice if female workers would automatically garrison the nearest building for protection, after being hit. -Players are recommended to use this stance for scouting enemy territory, and for female workers. Defensive (2nd one from the left): What it does currently. Please make the defense circle bigger. This one is very important since currently it's only useful vs. melee units (the A.I. is smart enough to know this weakness). Units should at least have enough space to attack standing enemy range units (not chase them though). -Players are recommended to use this stance for defending territories or buildings. Standing (1st one from the left): Another stance that is fine with me. Perhaps melee units could counter-attack though. It's funny to see a melee soldier standing still while he is being killed by arrows. lol -Players are recommended to use this stance for coordinating a range defense or offense, or if they want to block an area. Problems: Violent: Not very useful unless your looking to eliminate the enemy forces completely. Aggressive: Better than violent, but not much to distinguish itself. Defensive: Attack area is too small. It can be really annoying with melee units.

Have you folks considered adding a real time digital clock? I was thinking it would follow the computer's time, and could be somewhere on the top left. I only have my PC in my room to tell me the time, so when the games goes into full screen it can be a bit of worry after a while. or is there a windows mode I can quickly switch to back and worth? By the way, what recording software do folks use for the youtube channel? I attempted to install glc (since I use Ubuntu), but the instructions are a bit complicated.

If you folks don't mind, I would like to give my input on this semi-old topic. As much as I would like to deprive the enemy A,I from even harvesting renewable resources, it certainly would make the game a bit too long even for me (5 days playing same match thanks to save). The thing I think that should be implemented is resource stealing though. Basically, if I destroyed an enemy building I should get at least half the resources that were used to build it. It annoys me sometimes to spend resources on heavy units, only to find out it was an abandoned enemy base (*facepalm* if they started a heavy assault on your base while you were away). I think there should be some kind of benefit for this type of situation described above. Summary: It encourages players to take better care of their spent resources, and to attack more often as well. In other words, a balance of defense and offense.

Really enjoyed putting 20 archers on a super ship, and watching them clear a whole land area filled with enemy spear-man and calvary. Out of curiosity, when was this implemented in-game? I believe Alpha 5 was the last one I tried a suitable ship battle map. Also, is there plans to tweak or implement more features in relation to this area? Perhaps, increase the rate of fire of the battle ship instead of the archers own arrows? I am fine with either one, but was curious if this is being discussed.

It feels like their defense area is very small since sometimes archers and javelinist can pick them off without you noticing. Maybe if a ground aura or circle around the defense area could be displayed you could better manage their position. I gotta admit though that sometimes it's funny to see my spearman break formation and come back quickly to join it (like if he needed a bathroom break). Modifying Violence or Aggressive stance for workers: I think it would best fit violence. If an enemy goes into the violence territory, the worker will stop what he is working on and go attack them. Currently assigned job workers only counter-attack, but this can be a problem if the enemy decides to ambush him (happens very often at the beginning of a match when mining for resources or cutting trees).

I think the carthage are balanced. The super elephant can take down 2-3 towers by itself, but the other elephant cannot even take down 1 tower by itself. Also, they lack spear throwers and non-calvary heroes unit if I recall. I think Greece units are more powerful, although I can quite remember for which reasons (several different units, cheap prices, or survivability).

OMG, Yes! I was going to make a suggestion for it, but I thought that maybe it wouldn't be worth the coding. This is one of my favorite feature about other RTS game (World in Conflict I am looking at you ).

The idea is that the selected unit would protect their specified building from taking damage. If the soldier happens to also be a worker, then he will repair the building when it's not taking damage. This can be very useful for when the enemy is trying to flank your base, or trying to take out a key target (such as long range tower). This will also label the guard unit as being occupied (he technically has a job to do, other than standing around when no enemy is nearby). Currently the defense stance seems very limited in how it can help out compared to Aggressive stance (maybe if they went to their exact location before they broke apart).

It's not working still, right? (didn't see the "currently useless" comment now). Speaking of healers, now that I remember they now make male noises when selected (just in case you developers didn't notice it).

Well I figured the game would find one for me. That's why I suggested if someone wanted to volunteer to run a dedicated server. I would do it, but currently I cannot afford a great internet connection plan for hosting.

Would be nice if there was a dedicated multiplayer server running in 0 A.D. Also, would be great to find out whether we can connect online or not. All I get in the response is, "disconnected for unknown reason". I am on Ubuntu 11.04 64 bit, and I don't think it has to do with the router (other games connect just fine).

Are the war elephants usable? If so, what maps?