wowgetoffyourcellphone

0 A.D. is in serious trouble. Full stop, these mods are killing the game. @guerringuerrin is right, in that folks with skills to actually help with developing the core game would rather use that time and effort making what essentially amounts to cheating tools in order to destroy the PvP aspect of 0 A.D. for short term LoLz. Once multiplayer has been turned over to the cheaters and spammers and botters, it's a sure sign of the game's death.

Hi there. I could take a look at the files if you wish. @Stan` is on vacation.

The differences between a skirmish map and a scenario, is that a skirmish allows the players to choose their civs and the host to choose all kinds of settings, while a scenario is basically locked to what the designer has decided, creating a specific scenario or story

I think it will take top players to work with AI programmers to make worthy AIs. That, or top players becoming AI programmers.

Watch spelling: calvary -> cavalry Xenaphon -> Xenophon "However" is used thrice in a row. Calvary for a long time was a weak spot in Sparta’s military. For the longest time their only force was the hippeus, a force of 300 mounted infantry who would guard the kings and perform in religious ceremonies. However, in 424 BC the Spartans started putting those deemed unfit to fight on horses to ride as scouts. However the amount of Spartans who were calvary only ever amounted to only 60 per mora(Xenaphon wrote that a mora contained around 6,00 men). However, Sparta did bolster their ranks with mercenaries.

Ptw?

I think it could go both ways. Random AI name or choose a specific name to battle against.

If you run the simulation in atlas the changed resource amounts should work

Maybe others are talking about something else and mine is adjacent, but I mean that wood can be distributed in a way that is less likely to make placing buildings awkward. Also, what players want? Not sure how you quantify that, because what players want is the resources to win and that can be changed at any time by changes to the meta. In fact, the wood-heavy nature of the game is mostly just an accident.

It's actually pretty easy to adjust the amount of wood in the biome files if you want to play around with it. No need to touch the actual map generation code. \mods\public\maps\random\rmbiome\generic

I'd say keep the same amount of wood (or just slightly less) per map in Temperate, India, et al., just make them clumpier to make more room for construction.

Simply cutting max gatherers for trees from 8 to 5 in Delenda Est makes for a more spread out wood line, less unit clumping, etc.

hmm, maybe an overblown fear. I think wood would still be plentiful, just less so. Also, sometimes real improvements are hotly hated by the player base until the old meta shakes out and a new one adopted.

Indeed. I think a lot of maps have too much wood in general, but specifically in the starting area. Not just too much resources, but so many trees everywhere making building structures feel cumbersome sometimes.

Me* and almost everyone else says the same thing (for years!), but no one creates a phab patch for it. You'll see almost no skirmish map with the metal and stone tucked right up next to the CC, because I was the one creating those maps.

Love to see it. 0 a.d. in my Shorts queue.

Nice, you added a dedicated folder for the entries. Though, it's a bit redundant to have "encyclopedia/encyclopedia_palisade", should just be "encyclopedia/palisade."

Ah, Nescio...

It's a video game. The Fortress serves an interesting gameplay purpose.

Sanctuary of Artemis Orthias

I like it. It's not as "realistic" as the original, but what's important is that the concept is better realized from a gameplay standpoint

I never agreed with its removal, but I didn't care enough to argue about it at the time.

Ah yes, you are correct. One must return enough to break the tabbed indentation/formatting. I'm pretty sure though that only works in the xml templates and not the technologies (json). I could be proven wrong there too though. Lol Ah yes, you are correct. One must return enough to break the tabbed indentation/formatting. I'm pretty sure though that only works in the xml templates and not the technologies (json). I could be proven wrong there too though. Lol