wowgetoffyourcellphone

Looks good to me...

Detail comparison

@Sundiata

Melee Ranged Slaughter Splash

Now we need mountains.

For $20, it's a steal. 35 civs. Nice.

Yep! (I customized the environment settings)

Pro-tip. This applies to Ranged, Melee, and Slaughter attacks.

The new map names: Oceanside Temperate Road Farmland Seem awfully generic for skirmish map names, which are usually more lively or descriptive. Any ideas for better names?

BOOM SHAKA MAMA

I don't think so. For some reason a lot of the reference images seem to show a nice sheen on the thatch when in the sun.

This brother still be killin it, y'all. @Sundiata Acacias and African huts all up IN this bish.

Don't forget that every aura and every technology must also be changed.

Oh man, these look a lot nicer than some of your others! They fit quite well with LordGood's. My main critique of some of your other deciduous trees is that their foliage is very thin. I imagine you partially do that for performance, but the fact still remains. I do like how tall some of your trees are. Sometimes 0 A.D.'s trees seem a tad too small.

You're right, that is an edge case. In that instance you'd micro another unit to flank or ambush the target, or break off the attacker to attack something else. But that was understandable behavior and pretty rare.

I see what you mean now. Movement technologies, for example, would screw things up since the walk-attack animation would speed up with the walk speed statistic. Workaround? Maybe apply an inverse multiplier to the attack strength in such cases to that DPS stays the same. Just spitballing.

If the target was faster, the chasing unit would stop chasing after the target left vision range. It's the behavior of units in Age of Mythology, which is probably why I accept it more readily than most. In either option, one or the other unit moves, stops, moves, and stops again ad infinitum until one dies or moves out of range. In the unit behavior of 0 A.D. circa 2 weeks ago, the attacker would move to range, stop to attack (which registers a hit), then chases back to within range again to attack again. It worked to prevent the infinite chase sequence and eventually resolved the chase. Your proposed behavior is that the target moves, stops to be attacked, moves, stops to be attacked, until dead or captured. Either way there's a whole bunch of moving, stopping, and moving again (clunkeriffic). So I guess it doesn't really matter. I just thought it would look weird for a fleeing woman or gazelle to just stop and wait to be attacked again unless the enemy had moved from vision range. lol Does it really need turrets in order to work? It seems at most we need 4 new states (walk-attack, run-attack, walk-capture, run-capture) and 4 animations each for cavalry riders and infantry. But I don't have a programmer's understanding of this issue and could be super off-base.

Wonderful, I had a detailed reply, but the forum lost it...

The old behavior was if the chasing unit got within range, they would perform their action (capture or attack) and it would affect the target. then the chasing unit would chase back to within range and perform their action. Rinse. Repeat. Now, the chasing unit just chases the target across the map and never performs the action beyond the initial contact. This isn't correct behavior. I don't think D1970 is "better" behavior than before (at least as described in the D). So, a female will flee to flee distance and then wait to be attacked again? Old behavior was that they would flee as long as the enemy unit was chasing it which seemed to make more sense. Units didn't chase across the map because they were performing their attack whenever they chased to within attack range. Sure, the attacker moved, stopped to attack, moved again, stopped to attack, and looked funny. This worked more or less as it should have though, if a bit clunkily (I would prefer a "Move-Attack" state where units can attack or capture while chasing, which is the real comprehensive solution, but that may be out of scope of the changes you're trying to make). Question. No judgment, just curious. Do you play the game? That would certainly give you insight into the unit behavior. Your comments seem to indicate that you don't play the game, or else you would have been familiar with the old behavior.

Animals don't move from foundations. Chasing after animals (or enemy units) is bugged (they continue to chase the target across the map). Builders don't always face the foundation. Meh, tried again and the giraffe moved. Seems inconsistent though. I have noticed that if builders have to move off their own targeted foundation, then they stand idle.

No offense to bigtiger. He has some awesome stuff in his mod. He's done some pretty cool things with decals, for instance, which should be merged with core game, and I like the dead trees and fallen trees, which should also be merged. But LordGood's trees are actually better. At least, from what I see so far! Oh, and BigTiger's bushes should be merged too. Very nice. I think LordGood's oaks there finally have the "layering" effect right, to cast some nice self-shadowing and give that fullness expected from a mature set of trees. It's one of the things I like about the "old" Carobs.

Well, let's see 'em dog.

Alpha VIII Haxamanis was the big jump in visual quality.

Are you on git yet? It would help make it easier for contributors to keep up. (I'm at work, so I forget if the mod is on git yet or not)

Looks cool man. A couple requests? Some of the uv mapping looks stretched. Also, the models were exported at a negative altitude. Can reset them to 0? (changing the altitude using the template causes the foundation to float, lol; better to just re-export the models) Also, at the top needs to be a hole to allow hot air to escape. It would be nice if they had custom textures, but that may be asking too much! lol. Thanks for your work so far. Adding these to the Persians gives additional cultural flair! Loving it!