wowgetoffyourcellphone

Agreed. The mod selection screen looks pretty convoluted and unintuitive.

Maybe orange and black/dark brown?

Yasssss

Scenario maps would theoretically have triggers, locked teams, locked civs, storylines, locked victory conditions, specific starting resources, objectives, etc. Skirmish maps allow the flexibility of random maps, by allowing players to choose their civs, victory conditions, starting resources, and a few other options, while allowing the designer to sculpt a great-looking map in Atlas.

Siege Towers combatted units on walls so that ladders could be brought up. We need ladder teams.

DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING

You may have normal maps turned off.

Well, one guy asking about something doesn't make it s problem. An hourglass might look like a bone. Lol

I mean, it's a tiny little pixel art clock.

I would say most of the old terrains won't be compatible with the newer stuff, but there are some here and there which I'll poach for the terrain update. Excellent! You've been a big help so far.

No one is seriously proposing this.

There's just not much to do in general in the first 5-8 minutes except build ur eco, scout a little, and train units. At least in DE there are trading posts and mercenary camps to capture and map creeps to kill. Also you can rpg your hero a little bit.

IMHO, a disconnect should be made to count as a loss. Have a bad connection or your router randomly resets, then oh well sorry aboutcha. You lose. It's just the way it is.

I think I will set some units to 0 armor in DE. Thanks for bringing this up.

That's a review that should be done for all of the heroes in the game, actually. Thanks for bringing it up.

ctrl-c ctrl-v Edit: In case I was too cryptic, I'm insinuating that you say the same thing to every proposed change.

You want me to remove what's now duplicate with public? I can do that.

@Stan` I pushed some changes to the git repo.

Obvious improvement.

Well, again, it's a simulation attempting to get something close to what happened in history. Historically, archers weren't necessarily very good against pikes. It's not like phalangites had bigger shields or anything, I've read it may have been the "forest of pikes" phenomenon which scattered the incoming arrows. Very difficult to simulate in 0 A.D. with its very simple combat paradigm.

Want me to just throw the actors into the terrain and maps repo, or put @Freagarachto work and PM the files to them?

I agree that removing shuttling can solve some issues. I think it was determined to implement shuttling after the first few alphas to make the game look livelier (busier, more interesting to look at and manage). As noted, the "aura range" approach was restrictive and once shuttling was implemented, no other solutions were attempted. I would rather keep shuttling, but it needs fixed because of the movement rates. Luckily Delenda Est doesn't have this problem. But one way to mitigate it at least somewhat is to double carry capacity, which means units spend more time gathering and less time shuttling. Another way (perhaps in concert with the capacity change), is to implement a shuttling speed component in UnitMotion. A 2nd walking speed if you will, that we can make universal to all infantry, that kicks in when dropping off resources. Yes yes, people could potentially micro this to get around the shuttling speed, but I would say "good luck to you" micro-ing the shuttling of 100+ units while doing everything else. Lol Only going to happen in edge cases and not very important (there are ways to mitigate this at any rate).

I wondered this too. If the schema at that section allowed me to adjust animal numbers as sometimes they seem quite inadequate. Also having just 2 possible huntables severely limits a biome such as Savanna which has a large variety of herd animals. Biomes also don't let you choose dangerous animals?

Latest: https://github.com/JustusAvramenko/delenda_est

Ban them? No. Just remove the default pop bonus for these civs.