chaosislife
-
Posts
163 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by chaosislife
-
-
None of those files are referenced by the siege tower, so it's not that. The siege tower does however produce a BuildingAI.js error if used a lot (at least it does for me).
yeah thats the one I'm getting, it also apears that i get the shots from the tower coming at the enemy from off-screen occasionally. Well actually it is if it looks like this :
ERROR: Error in timer on entity 5065, IID 35, function FireArrows: TypeError: Engine.QueryInterface(target, IID_Position) is null ("Ranged",5491)@simulation/components/Attack.js:160 ([object Object],0)@simulation/components/BuildingAI.js:159 ([object Object])@simulation/components/Timer.js:89
-
I keep getting this one sort of randomly :
ERROR: JavaScript error: simulation/ai/jubot/military.js line 745 TypeError: targetPos is undefined ([object Object],[object Object])@simulation/ai/jubot/military.js:745 ()@simulation/ai/jubot/jubot.js:115 ([object Object])@simulation/ai/common-api/base.js:90
No clue on how to cause it. I suppose it could be related to the new helepolis since I'm playing with that alot, trying to figure out how to produce the error I keep getting about it's arrows not firing or somesuch.
-
What if we made it into a torture minigame? Like a screen that shows the various tools and lets you decide where to insert/use them? Then you'd get civ bonuses or resources for making him crack, and funny screams if you don't.
-
How about limiting it to the passive stance so he has no auto attack but still allowing him a really powerful assassination capability? Wouldn't be enough to use him to take out armies, but enough so that he could whack a hero.
-
I would be in favour of the game supporting at least 500 units. But 300 is already better than 200, for sure.
I agree with frapell on this one, the population limit in AoE is really annoying. Some might say that this increases the strategy element of the game, but I just like to build massive armies and watch the ensuing carnage. From my testing of Alpha 5 (I can't run the SVN version due to being on OS X) I would say the 500 is a pretty good amount of population, but it is very laggy.
On a side note, I've always wanted someone to make a RTS game with old-school 2D graphics, with the system requirements of say AoE 1, but then to make it have a massive population limit (maybe even thousands). Surely this would run smoothly on the shiny machines we have today? Total Annihilation has a 5000 pop limit patch, but the pathfinding is already pretty shoddy with small numbers of units. I have never really seen the point in RTS games being 3D, other than to keep up with the other games. AoK already has more than good enough graphics to see what is going on... But yeah, I'm going
now. I'll stop.I think part of it will be in how many units you actually have in the field as opposed to garrisoned units for defense. As it is right now, I could see myself running into a situation where I can't raise an army of worthwhile force without leaving all of my defenses empty, which would be a problem with human players since I'm going to assume from the start that they'd use similar tactics to me........and have an army waiting to attack my base while I'm attacking theirs. Other problems come when you factor in the actual population cost of some units, if you use alot of cavalry the pop limit might as well be 100. If I use the still in the works helepolis it actually costs I think 3 for the unit and then 15 at least to fully arm it bringing it up to 18 total cost per helepolis. And it's not wise to just send one right now, they wind up spending alot of time running away from that one melee fighter that survived to stab the side of it. Personally I favor the only limitation on population being on how many houses you can build per civ center.
-
It's easy to edit the 'maxPop' value in the Player.js file using notepad.
off to test what a setting of -666 does. Bwahahaha.
-
I'm not big on only having only one of any unit, if I only have one then I wouldn't bother using them unless they were required, and then i'd just garrison it somewhere safe so the enemy couldn't kill it. Expensive is okish but could there be a way to make the unit cost a bit of pay per minute? That way it would be like you have to pay them a monthly wage to keep them working.
-
Espionage Unit:
Description: Great for keeping track of where an enemy unit is located.
Stats:
+Cannot be automatically attacked by any unit except Celtic Dogs (they can sniff who belongs and who doesn't )
+Will follow an enemy unit till attacked or given a new command
-Cannot attack only counter-attack a unit
-Weak against melee and ranged units
Basically, think of the espionage unit as the equivalent of a radar in modern games. The radar can only be attacked when spotted, so in order to kill any spies in your units you must manually point and order to attack him. This would keep players double checking their main base/assault which I think will add more interesting game-play to 0 A.D (this is a strategy game after all
).Sorry about the "idea" threads, but 0 A.D gets me brain going.
Be easier if it was just a unit that both players had control over, then he could hide by assuming the role of an enemy or even "ally" unit. The spy could be able to change teams, at which point he would be controllable by that player as well as being ultimately controllable by his spymaster. Dependent upon how his population value was attributed one tactic could be filling an enemies ranks with spies and then diverting them whenever they were sent to attack you, that would be somewhat obvious to a human opponent, but the AI isn't so bright. They should probably be hideously expensive at least in metal. If we made spy a sort of upgrade for all units then it wouldn't have to be a specific spy model. Perhaps set it up as a way to bribe units with a good amount of metal so that they then transform into a spy?
-
Appears to be fixed now, way to go Ben!
-
In a not so helpful way, I just tried building under 2008 to test this, build went fine with no errors, game booted fine but fully crashed the instant any map i tried has loaded. Might just be me, but idk.
Edit: According to this :
Assertion failed: "m_W && m_H"
Location: Grid.h:130 (SparseGrid<struct PathfindTile>::SparseGrid)
Call stack:
SparseGrid<PathfindTile>::SparseGrid<PathfindTile> (grid.h:130)
this = (unavailable)
w = 0 (0x0000)
h = 0 (0x0000)
CCmpPathfinder::ComputePath (ccmppathfinder_tile.cpp:399)
this = (unavailable)
x0 =
value = 10255479 (0x009C7C77)
z0 =
value = 32684868 (0x01F2BB44)
it looks to be an issue with the paths. Guess I'll have to wait a while eh?
-
I'm figuring the the path system would plot a path around the gate because it would simply see the gate as an obstruction like any other building, and ideally it would be an obstruction until your units are actually about to go through it. There'll have to be something in the pathing system that treats allied gates as passable but non-allied gates as non-passable so the pathing system will at least plot a long course to take the unit through the gate. The short path plotting will have to be the one to determine whether the gate is actually open or not. Either way tho, enemy and allied units should favor the gates when making the path calculations instead of trying to plot a path way,way,way around the map. Maybe make gates in general not get calculated as obstructions at all in the long pathing? Heh, I'm speaking nonsense like the devs now.
-
Any chance of getting stances for siege units, in particular telling them to stand still?
-
1
-
-
Come to think of it, units will probably still go around gates even when they're finally working, might have to make a note to update the pathing when the gates finally work.
-
Of course you can attack your enemies only with women. But I'm not sure if such attack will be successful.
Dogs are better.
no......haha......comment.....bwhahahahaha.
-
If we don't include them in the official release it would be trivial for modders to add them. If they work nicely, we could then include them into the official release in a patch. This is how I feel improvements like these, which are outside the realm of the design document and our current understanding of the gameplay, will come to be included in the game.
Ya that's about how I think about most of our ideas, if the devs aren't enlightened enough to do what I want them to (haha) then the modders probably will.
-
May need to rebuild the EXE or wait for an autobuild.
Yeah, I noticed the fix comes right after the last autobuild so that could be it.
-
Double post cuz i don't know if editing announces activity.
I was looking at the svn and it appears there was a fix for this at revision 9720, which it says is a fix for #879, I can't find #879 in the trac and I don't seem to be able to view by ticket number so I just have to assume it's the same thing as this. Problem is that from what I can tell the issue hasn't changed at all, critters of all types are still standing in the middle of the foundations. Just thought I'd mention it, ya know, in case no one noticed, or if it's just happening for me.
-
Defensive structures like Walls, Towers, and Fortresses would have to be destroyed by siege equipment.
Which brings us back to "What if we don't have siege equipment?" Can we attack with infantry?
-
Limitations drive strategy innovation and creativity.
That can be difficult in a game as games often have rules like perhaps women not being able to attack which means that no matter how much you might want to send an army of women to fight their women, you just can't. I also doubt I'll be able to defeat them by sneaking someone in to toss a corpse in their well.
-
Eh, that still leaves the problem of where to get the resources you need to trade for other resources if the map is empty. Also if the only resource you have a good supply of is food and the market is based on trading resources you have for resources others have, and everyone has a steady supply of food then the value of food is going to be pretty much nothing. Tho i suppose we're probably talking about an aokesque market system which still leaves you with needing huge amounts of food to trade for a much smaller amount of wood,metal, or stone. Does bring up an interesting idea tho, trying to wipe out your enemies using only women.I'm not saying markets aren't a good idea at all, honestly I'd rather have both markets as well as tree and (maybe) critter regrowth and recycling stone and metal. I think what I really want to avoid is having the game end because no one can produce anymore units to fight or defend with. The way I play is largely defensive so I could very easily outlast everyone else if they don't manage to send a force sufficiently large enough to completely destroy me in about five minutes.
-
Markets and Trade routes will make the economy "renewable" enough, IMHO. All of you guys are forgetting about that.
So why don't we just skip resource gathering altogether and just have players magically spawn whatever they need from a market? And while we're at it lets just give them a "win game" button they can press so they don't have do do silly things like building an army?
Markets are boring.
-
Please, 0AD's gonna be beatin em off with a stick in no time, thats what you get when you go open-source, aka, "the future". In a few years most of the RTS games will be based on pyrogenesis and AoE will just be a joke to entertain the noobs.
-
So i don't get something for those? bummer.
-
What does +1 mean anyhow?
Jubot: A Marginally Improved Ai
in Game Development & Technical Discussion
Posted · Edited by chaosislife
Perhaps, for clarity's sake, we should say lagging instead of slow or that the code is slowing things down? Lag is generally understood by gamers to mean a drastic performance decrease. It could be understood that we're talking about the rate of military and economic growth by the AI otherwise.
Oh also, I'm not certain that the enemies standing idle is directly related to the recent lag. As I've seen it in the past if the enemy has several gatherers that seem to be standing around in a group it does create lag, but the lag is most likely due to either pathing or perhaps something more directly to do with them not being able to get at the resource that's off the edge of the map. My units do it all the time too. Perhaps something could be figured out to make them skip resources they can't actually get close enough to to gather. Either that or something in the editor that calculates and removes unattainable resources?