Jump to content


Community Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Giotto

  1. Ok thanks. Yes it was when rejoining.
  2. Yes i am playing with AI. Is there any chance this will be fixed in next release? Also i have just finished a game and got that error. Will it still be useful if i return the ooslogs and commands.txt?
  3. Next time i play and it happens i will look for them.
  4. Just had another look and this has been posted before. But not recently and it doesn't seem to have been fixed. Using alpha 21 btw.
  5. Hi. This has been a problem for a while but i haven't bothered to post this as a error yet. Sorry if there is already a similar topic, i did a search but found nothing. The issue is that when i am disconnected from a LAN game, as sometimes happens due to the poor quality of one of our computers, i rejoin but get an "out of sync error". This means that both players have slightly different games going on that slowly diverge from each other over time. I can't quit and rejoin either. The error does not turn up the second time, but the game remains out of sync. It's really annoying as you can imagine. Particularly when you find out that your ally was destroyed 10 mins ago. I am running the game on Ubuntu and our WiFi connection is good. Hope you know what's going on and if it will be solved at some point.
  6. That is true. Not a huge difference, but yes, when you expand you get a predefined set of land. Not to say that would be a better design than what 0ad has (i do like how it is now), but i imagine predefined sections would be good for ensuring one cannot create too many chokeholds, as well as preventing those annoying situations where you expand, but can't fit a wall in due to a forest or something. Still, the current system is fine in my opinion. On the point about the line, it seems to be much wider, has a different (less harsh) color, and has some gradual alpha transition.
  7. Yeah, the transparency is nice. And the border is slightly wider i think. The current lines are a bit harsh to look at. Though to be honest it's not the most pressing issue.
  8. I think it's definitely well crafted and thought through, but yea the game doesn't suit me. I don't like the idea of only having a certain number of buildings in an area (though i see why they did that), and the unit control is a bit odd.
  9. I recently bumped into this game called northgard. It's in early access and i noticed it had similar mechanics to 0ad in some ways. The territory concept is the same, and a lot of the art feels like the Gauls or Britons. I have played it for an hour now, and it is quite different to 0ad, but can't shake that feeling that it is somehow similar. Anyway, it wasn't really my type of game, but here are some screenshots and maybe if people are interested in gameplay ideas, check it out.
  10. Wow, looks like loads of improvements in this version!
  11. This looks great! Any general changes in troop balancing that I should know?
  12. This sounds great but how do you get it actually implemented or initiate a discussion with developers? A mod?
  13. I really like the concept of individual city phases but I also think there is a need for general upgrades. The general upgrades would be available as they are at the civic centre and would unlock technology's such as stone towers etc. The city phases would upgrade to use these new technology's. A level 1 city would have wooded towers, a level 2 city would have stone ones.
  14. It is vital that the upgrades are polar/very different. At present it is hard to tell how an upgrade has really helped and whether it is worth getting. What you choose needs to have an impact on or reflect your game strategy. e.g (stage 3) Option 1- choice to join some empire - 20% cost reduction to everything. Option 2- some kind of extra training thing - 50% stronger ranged units. Option 1 should be chosen if you have a strong economy and can thus pump out lots of troops. Option 2 should be chosen if you either have a strong ranged army or are planing on defending. Overall I think this is a great idea but it needs to have an impact on gameplay otherwise it is pointless. Also why not change the name of some of the upgrades to fit the civilisation?
  15. I think having options as in age of mythology is very appealing and adds unique strategical value to the game. It does not need to be complicated it just needs to be visible and clear to the player what they get from it. Fundamentally I think this is the manifestation of players want for more technology's, particularly either/or ones as in alpha 16 (though those ones had little strategic value, but if they were grouped together?)
  16. 0ad is far better because almost every aspect of the game is thoroughly examined by both players and developers. It is amazing that the game is doing so well despite being in alpha and having a solely volunteer development team.
  17. Holding alt and then selecting gets only troops.
  18. I can't believe you went and made an account and forum post for this. Pathetic. Get your ego in check. You literally said "bogus not realistic strategy" and then listed empire earth lol.
  19. Good for you. Got an idea of how to fix that or is this just another pointless comment?
  20. Something to do with lighting I think. Or the lag was reduced to the point at which I could enable more options. Particles look great. Not sure if they were changed though.
  21. The game is looking fantastic now. A couple of releases ago the art looked a little scruffy but now everything looks beautiful. I love the new maps and the amount of detail in them.
  • Create New...