sanderd17
-
Posts
2.225 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
77
Posts posted by sanderd17
-
-
This is my first post ever..
This wasn't about you. Some post in between was deleted. It was about someone else who keeps making suggestions for 0AD that are already implemented, or don't fit with the kind of game 0AD wants to be.
-
I agree.
Including an easy way to access the history of a faction when you choose it and a screenshot of a city or army with that faction could help a lot. Currently, accessing the history of a faction requires you to get back to the main menu.
Something for the UI redesign I guess.
-
Ok but the tower was always the color of the enemy, IA is put around but did not attack ...
Ah, so it also happened when the enemy wasn't beaten yet?
Well, I believe you can't attack walls and wall towers with normal units. And it looks like you're playing with the athenians. Athenians only have ballistas as siege engines, (I don't know if it has improved lately), but as far as I know, the AI didn't really know how to efficiently pack and unpack them. Most of the time, they just go into a cycle, without doing any damage.
So to prevent this:
* don't let the AI handle the Iberians (as it will tear down the walls immediately, it can't handle walls),
* if you want a realistic game, don't use the Athenians until the ballistas are fixed. If you play against Athenians, they have a hard time getting your buildings down.
-
now that's a big deception
There are some talks about "capturing" a unit though, and making it a slave for you.
-
It's a problem with AI.
When an opponent is killed, its remaining buildings become owned by Gaia (=nature).
But the AI doesn't attack Gaia elements, even if they are threatening it (like a tower) or blocking its way.
-
Je voulais dire que les bâtiments devraient avoir plus de niveau et débloquerais plus d'autres options et changer d'apparence quand le niveau augmente.
Plus de niveaux? Comme les phases (village-town-city)? Les technologies sont seulement inclus depuis Alpha XII, donc beaucoup va changer dans le "technology tree". Je pense pas qu'ils vont changer l'apparence, car ça coûte beaucoup de travail.
-
Hello sanderd17,
You are Belgian and you don't speak french?
I can't explain in english for buildings =/
Je parle assez de français pour vous comprendre, donc vous pouvez l'expliquer en français.
-
1
-
-
Wohoo, another Belgian.
Hello,
Above all, I am sorry for my English, but I'm from Belgium and I speak French.
...
The game will be translated into French soon?
There currently isn't a translation interface. Some developers are looking at it. Once there's an interface, I'm sure it will arrive in French pretty soon, as there are a few French guys active.
....
The buildings should be more level, I think.
I don't understand this, you want to explain?
More different in unlocked soldiers.
...
Same civilisations make it easy to balance, different civilisations make it more interesting. It's a matter of making the right choices. This far, the designers wanted to give each civilisation something very unique (unique unit or building), although that didn't work out with all of them.
-
2. Multithreading support: Separating AI and Simulation from the rendering would about double the average framerate and would get rid of lag-spikes happening when for example the AI calculates the map for dropsite placement (multiple seconds on large maps!). I've tried doing that for the AI but my conclusion was that the spidermonkey upgrade needs to be done first (3).
Multithreading would make the game so much faster. If you would put every AI in its own thread, you could play 1human vs 3AI on a quad core, and it would still be faster than the current 1 vs 1.
-
Why don't make a survey in main page or Facebook page?
Temporary surveys are better. As the game develops more and more, you don't want to average the results over different releases.
That said, maybe it could give a nice insight if every time after the release a new survey is launched. You could investigate how much better it becomes version after version.
-
Ancient Aliens man, it's all Ancient Aliens.
And I give you some very trustworthy sources:
http://www.alienswerehere.com/AncientAlienEvidence.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_astronauts
Now do remember, Poe's law always applies, but you never know in which direction.
-
1. Build a dock. (you must be at the 1st phase, so three better ships are locked till you upgrade)
2. You can't click on the icons, but you can press the hotkeys... and they work :-)
Confirmed to work here. Pressing the hotkeys causes to produce the units, no matter if they're locked or not.
-
At what time it will achieve in the game?
It's already in the game (in the svn repo). Just look in the atlas and you can add them.
-
This water rendering is just amazing, I thought I'd leave it here:
http://mashable.com/...eo-water-games/
It probably won't be possible in 0AD (given the amount of water on some maps), but you never know.
-
2. Entity/Actor/Prop XMLs:
- Problem: Not only is XML inefficient to parse, it's also much harder to actually read and edit. To make it worse, the filesystem overhead for these hundreds of files is huge (!). Loading times for weaker filesystems can be very long.
- Solution: use a simplified text parser for entity/actor/prop parsing to increase speed. Group common actors/entities into single text files (e.g. - units_athenian.txt) while still retaining the 'modability' of the game. All current data can be easily converted from XML to the desired (custom) format.
- Result: Loading times and memory usage will decrease dramatically (which is a pretty awesome thing I might add).
In the distribution version, I believe everything is packed in one zip blob. If this still isn't efficient enough, maybe take a look at the pbf format: http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/ The reading speed of PBF is about 6 times that of XML, and the files are a lot smaller.
As a drawback, PBF isn't editable, so it would probably only fit in the official releases. Translation of XML into PBF goes pretty quick too.
And for the pathfinder, take into account that a lot of paths are often to the same place (like how many times does a citizen soldier needs to go to a certain dropsite), but with different starting positions.
So flowfields (backwards pathfinding+storing) could help with that. Flowfields are mentionned on the forums here.
- Problem: Not only is XML inefficient to parse, it's also much harder to actually read and edit. To make it worse, the filesystem overhead for these hundreds of files is huge (!). Loading times for weaker filesystems can be very long.
-
Je ne sais pas quel niveau d'anglais que vous avez, mais je dois demander d'éviter d'utiliser des machines à traduction.
J'ai vu des exemples ou c’était impossible d'aider une personne parce que il utilisait une machine comme ça.
si vous voulez répondre en Anglais, c'est mieux d'aussi télécharger une version française.
Merci en avance pour votre travail. Et bienvenue sur les fora.
(et excuser moi pour mon niveau de français, c'est seulement ma troisième langue)
-
...
@Mythos Ruler, also see the first part of that video:
(You can remove my comment if you added that).
-
What is supposed to be "the right combination"? In real live it still comes down to the quality of the equipment and numbers. If we don't plan asymmetric warfare it indeed comes down to numbers.
The right combination should be something a player learns by playing the game. If all his units are melee, he shouldn't be able to win, and if all his units are ranged, he shouldn't be able to win either.
But this was only some Idea, if others have different ideas, I'm fine with that. After all, it those who do the work that get to choose how it's implemented.
I suggest we come back to the subject about how formations should be managed.
-
Why "shouldn't" ranged units kill melee units (no matter in which state each of them are)? Doesn't it depend on the amount of each? They are about the same price so they should be about as effective.
They can kill a melee unit, but generally, ranged units are better at breaking the strength of an army, before they enter the real battle. Until WWI, ranged units were primarily used for a first attack (in WWI, this was done by firing a single shot). But once (healthy) melee units reach the ranged units, they're no match any more because they lack armour and suitable weapons (unless they have a secondary attack).
When you use a right combination of ranged units to weaken the army, and melee units to finish the work, you should be able to defeat a bigger army that doesn't use the right combination. Currently, this isn't really the case, everything just comes down to total numbers.
-
Are all occurences of "trees outside the map scope" fixed now? Because I've seen some trees outside the map of gulf of bothnia in my build from April 5th.
Also, every now and then, a berry bush appears inside a stone or metal mine, and workers from the AI desperately want to get it.
I do launch my games from command line lately, if that makes a difference (regarding the allowed map sizes etc, although I normally use the default map size)
-
2. Armor values are in flux. And usually, ranged units were meant to be used to soften up the enemy formation before the melee.
I know you're not really in favour of that HP - effectiveness link proposed here, but such a link could really help ranged units soften up the melee units in formation. Ranged units and defence buildings should not be able to kill a complete formation of melee units, but they should be able to soften them up a big deal.
It would make the battle a bit more realistic because players would want to keep their ranged units outside the battle, and use them mostly at the beginning of the battle.
-
Oh ... yes xD, but they're less aesthetically pleasing :-(
And have less range, and no "double arrows" technology. So as towers (although they have the same firing power according to the UI), they're not that useful.
Anyway, it's equal for every player.
-
Or maybe experiment with a different restriction: a minumum distance between the towers.
So a player can't make a "wall of towers" anymore, but can protect (almost) all ground with it.
I think half of the range of the tower would be good as a minimum distance, so players don't need to leave a gap in their defence line, and towers can still protect each other.
-
This concept is mainly about the relationship between the HP and effectiveness (maybe damage, armor, speed) of a unit.
The lower the HP, the less effective it is....but not too taxing on the player by having a small effect e.g. 100% HP = 15 or 10% reduction in effectiveness.
I agree with the concept, less hp is less effective. But the function should be simple. Just calculate the percentage of HP left, and apply that percentage to all attack parameters (maybe ceil them to have at least a bit of strength)
Btw, it all reminds me of this:
[Discussion] Blacksmith
in Game Development & Technical Discussion
Posted
will it only be for tech research? or will it also have a separate unit you can create with it? or a certain aura or other bonus.
if it's only for tech research, one building will be enough, while it's nice to see cities with a big diversity of buildings.
If I may propose a unit, what about a 'repairer', someone who can't fight, but who can repair buildings quite fast (repairing buildings with normal units is slow, and usually not worth the effort).