wowgetoffyourcellphone

Good post FleXoR. Question, why does player need to know the bold part? I am curious why you think the armor value need to be broken down like this into a calculation. I mean what good is it for the player to be shown what the original armor valye was when immediate concerns are more immediate (the current value is what is important to the success of the unit, not what its armor value was 5 minute ago). If armor values were more fluid I can understand showing the calculation (example: if the player could debuff the armor at-will to reduce cost temporarily). I think in your post you are talking about hierarchies of information right? Up-front, you want the most basic of information to make a quick inform decision to use or train this troop over that other troop. If you want to delve into more detail (if you have time to do it in a match), then you can do that in a deeper UI layer. Is this what you are getting at? If so, I can agree. I think a tab, like Lion show, can be nice and player can then see the stats. Or like you said, a tooltip over the unit icon or click icon to see the eoncyclopedia entry with all the information a fanatic wants to know. But upfront in the main UI, only the very basic is need to be show to make a quick decision. I don't think this is major problem at all. Whether my cavlary has 3 hack armor or 4 hack armror means nothing to me in the middle of a battle. I'm going to care what I should use it for, which is to attack ranged unit. Cavalry should not be used in stand-up fight against melee infantry, so this is what need to be conveyed. Using abstract armor and attack number in the main ui does not convey this as directly as can be done in other ways. In heat of battle this^ is what need to be known by most player. I think in deeper UI layer can go all the stat the mathematicians want to crunch. Techs woould be like this (this is a +2 hack armor levels tech for Stabby Cavalry): Obviously, some will agree with this and others in this thread will not. UI design is always controversial. Opinions evolve and ideas get honed. I think the toggle option for 'Detailed Tooltip' was a very brilliant compromise.

Look much better. It have spec and noromal map too?

One of best tutorials for 0 A.D. Great job. Good job remind to extrude trunk below terrain (although dont need extrude that far). Mayb you can export example trees to game for us? Also, should trunks have a "chop point" where the tree will eventually be chopped and fall down?

I am with karamel. Unit role should be the point. Unit roles are way way way more important than the stats. In fact, I think it better to rewrite tech tooltips to better reflect this point of view (Instead "+2 pierce armor to spearman", say "Spearman +2 resistance against ranged attacks"). Make the unit roles more clear.

True. In 0 A.D. the walls are stronger than the cheapo walls in other game. I think the towers can still be 100 stone, but the long sections can be super cheap. Either way, the game should still: 1. Walls (and other building) can be place over straggler trees (add flag to tree template). 2. Builders automatically spread out to the length of the wall to build it instead of starting from only one end.

Make walls less expensive (or add tech to make them cheaper) and add some feature to make building them easier. 1. Walls (and other building) can be place over straggler trees (add flag to tree template). 2. Builders automatically spread out to the length of the wall to build it instead of starting from only one end.

I actually kind of like this simplified view for hero. Maybe have standard list of auras and hero can have any 2 of them.

Principate Romans use imp_support_citizen (traine at Civic Center) and imp_support_slave_female (trained at Farmstead, good for food gather and die after a 5 mins) and imp_support_slave_male (trained at storehousew, good for mining and die after 5 mins). Most analogous to female_citizen is the citizen, since he trained from Civic center and available at start of match. "CitizenSoldiers" for this civ like Roman Legionaires can only build buildings. I don't expect much support for mod right now though consider game still evolving. I just report this warning because it tell me to. haha I know mod support not top priority.

I agree with this. The new art looks too modern with rendering capabilities. Perhaps they should rerender all of the old art sets?

WARNING: PlayerID 2 | Tried to add the inexisting template units/imp_support_female_citizen to Petra. Please report this on the forums WARNING: PlayerID 2 | Plan training units/imp_support_female_citizen canceled WARNING: JavaScript warning: simulation/ai/petra/queueplan--.js line 56 reference to undefined property this.cost ERROR: JavaScript error: simulation/ai/common-api/resources.js line 32 TypeError: that is undefined m.Resources.prototype.add@simulation/ai/common-api/resources.js:32:3 m.QueuePlan.prototype.getCost@simulation/ai/petra/queueplan--.js:56:2 m.Queue.prototype.maxAccountWanted@simulation/ai/petra/queue.js:73:3 m.QueueManager.prototype.distributeResources@simulation/ai/petra/queueManager.js:316:8 m.QueueManager.prototype.update@simulation/ai/petra/queueManager.js:446:2 m.PetraBot.prototype.OnUpdate@simulation/ai/petra/_petrabot.js:125:3 m.BaseAI.prototype.HandleMessage@simulation/ai/common-api/baseAI.js:81:2 I think the AI randomly got assigned to Romans (Principates) and that civ does not have a female citizen. I this will pop up in other mod as well in the future. Maybe Petra can parse gather rates and assign unit according to these instead of by template? Is that hard? I don't know this. Or maybe look for template classes (we can add 'ai cheater' classes to the non-visible classes to help the ai out). So, instead of look for {civ}_female_citizen, look for classes: citizen gatherer farmer. Last one is class for ai to know to prefer this units for farming. Ai can look for classes "gatherer forager" to select units to go pick berry. I add this ideas for ai's planning. I know the original warning is a different problem.

lol, scout should not need to come back to leader.

In Delenda Est player capture merc camp like capturing a civic center. task units to go capture and they use capture animation. Mercs only take 5 second to train (0 second for Ptolemies). (it have 1000 capture points; civic center have 3000) Just need a <Undeletable /> flag and a <Unattackable /> flag for merc camp template.

I feel like the new civ buildings have way better renders. The old buildings from 1999 don't have good ambient occlusion, etc. compared to the new sets. We will see if new sets stand out.

Some secondary attack should be different than other. A Roman soldier throwing a pilum is diffrent than a Immortal switching between bow and spear for an example.

Some building, but most fine. What didn't licking bird criticise about?

Q#2: Grand Ages of Rome has "level of detail" in the engine. When ytoyu zoom out the assets switch to lower def version of themselves to save rendering.

One must be prop.

If you like to make a real texture that can be great. Maybe the existing siege weapon textures can be helpful? You can see how some part metal bracket, some part sinew "spring", some part rope, etc.

I dont know what you're saying. It is already baked. Here is diffuse texture base on the AO map it had: But model does not have AO set of UVs.

Temples healing building is intended to make the Temple more important. But I think it should not heal walls. What was problem with fortress?

The problem is the UV map. The model is mapped to a AO map method, so I can only mod AO map texture for diffuse results. Hope that malke sense. Will need a proper uv map and diffuse texture for the onager.

Player color and diffuse color for Onager

hele_round_c.dds already have dolphin tecture.

Get rid of the extra "wooden tower" thing added to game (last alpha?). Just make Defense Tower weak in Phase 1, like 500 hp (or less!). Make defender have to spend money on upgrade the tower to make them deadlier for defense in later phase II, III (IV in my mod). Melee cav don't need to be so strong to take down a 500hp wooden tower in Phase I or II (un-upgraded). Phase II can have tech upgrade to stone tower, with actor change (as in Delenda Est). Has double health now. Tougher to take down, but now they cost Stone too, so more expensive for the extra toughness. So, use stone for walls, Phase III tech, or stone Defens Towers? Defender must decide. While defender use stone to build tower and walls, attacker is using stone to upgrade to Phase III and get siege to kill defender's walls and tower. None of this need Slinger to have siege capability (lulz). Make slinger the anti-range ranged unit or just be cheap ranged support for the meat shield (or both), while Javelin Infantry and Archer Infantry are more specialize (Archer and Javelin Infantry seem to be more common to the most civs). Just some thoughts this lovely morning.