Nescio

Today I started creating a gameplay mod for the current (svn) development version of 0 A.D. “Empires Ascendant”. Although there are already multiple gameplay mods, and the aim of improving gameplay for the next alpha is not unique, this one has a different approach: each change has its own patch on https://code.wildfiregames.com/, to make it easier for the team to discuss, play-test, review, and implement them. Open gameplay balance patches available on phabricator (can also be found withhttps://code.wildfiregames.com/search/query/MwAW9pins9Vt/ ): D3565: Make all support units bribable. D3563: Make theater cheaper. D3528: Bring turnRate back to realism. D3523: Bring projectile speeds to realistic values. D3488: Lower unit movement speed. D3487: Unify unit vision range. D3486: Lower soldier vision range. D3466: Make wall turrets upgrade into proper towers. D3431: Increase ram damage D3418: Purge Battlefield Medicine. D3417: Balance pike again. D3416: Fix unlock shared dropsites requirement. D3407: Add food/researchtime cost to reformed_army / traditional_army. D3404: Make gather technologies less effective. D3392: New kush civ bonus. D3390: New cart market civ bonus. D3377: Enable cart basic infantry javelineer. D3341: Move some trainable animals to higher phases. D3319: Differentiate rams. D3318: Move will to fight technology from fortress to wonder. D3246: Increase advanced and elite and lower champion ranged attack damage. D2988: Replace corral technology. D2965: Separate chariot templates. D2956: Tweak ship costs and tweak merchant ships. D2900: Separate camels from cavalry templates. D2886: Introduce crossbowman templates. D2854: Introduce centre tech progression. D2845: Change phase bonuses. D2769: Add visible garrison points to wall towers. D2648: Make Caratacos and Maximus auras local. D2535: Remove pop cap civ bonuses. D2508: Prevent ships and siege engines from attacking fields. D2506: Allow building fields in neutral territory. D2477: Garrison units on short wall segments. D1400: Hero aura revision. D1351: Reduce cavalry gather rate. D904: Themistocle aura 1 modify. D497: Allow hunting aggressive and violent wild animals. D76: Revisit Vision (and Ranged Attack) ranges. Abandoned: Tagging everyone listed in the `balancing.json` credits file: @Acumen, @Alex, @Alexandermb, @Allen ROBOT, @alpha123, @arissa_nightblade, @bb_, @borg-, @Deiz, @elexis, @fatherbushido, @Feldfeld, @Freagarach, @Grugnas, @Hannibal_Barca, @historic_bruno, @LordGood, @Matei, @mimo, @Mythos_Ruler, @Nescio, @niektb, @Pureon, @quantumstate, @sanderd17, @scythetwirler, @Stan`, @temple, @ValihrAnt, @Wijitmaker, @wraitii. Please refrain from discussing individual changes in this forum thread; go to corresponding phabricator page instead (click on the links in the list above). To try out individual changes, just include the corresponding patch in your repository (e.g. `arc patch D888`; and `svn revert -R *` to remove them again). If you know of other small, up-to-date patches (only gameplay balancing, not art, maps, mechanics, etc.), feel free to propose them for inclusion in this list. Other feedback is also welcome.

@Alexandermb, @Stan`, @wowgetoffyourcellphone, are these selection overlays something you'd like to have available in the svn version? 256x256 circle (left) vs 128x512 ellipse (right), for comparison:

Well, we all know earth is a flat circle, and if you throw it down that hole, “a brazen anvil falling from earth nine nights and days would reach Tartarus upon the tenth.” (Hesiod Theogony 724-725)

Only desert-dwelling peoples (“Arabs”) fought from dromedary camel-back; they occassionally served as auxiliaries or mercenaries for (or against) larger empires (Assyrians, Persians, Seleucids), but there is not really a need to create separate actors for different civilizations. Basically: Arab camel archer Arab camel javelineer Arab camel spearman (just in case) Arab camel swordsman The sword in question was very long (four cubits) and very thin; basicallly it was 2 meter-long needle, probably only useful for piercing; see Livy below. Arab camels serving in Xerxes I's army (480 BC) are attested by Herodotus: Arab camels serving in Antiochus III's army at the battle of Magnesia (190 BC) are attested by Livy: and by Appian, apparently deriving from the same source: Although it's possible Arab camels served in a Ptolemaic army (the Nabateans were allied with them), I don't know of any actual evidence for that.

According to Polybius, the hastati, principes, and triarii were all similarily equipped, and wore three c. 0.5 m long, upright, dark feathers on their helmets: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plb.+6.23&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0233 http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Plb.+6.23&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0234

As @Angen pointed out, it's actually perfectly possible to allow placing units on gates; the issue is that those units are within the gate's <PassRange>, which means it will always remain open, which kind of defeats its purpose. However, I don't seen why short wall segments are supposed to be ungarrisonable; hence D2477. Just because Japan is influential nowadays doesn't make it significant in antiquity. (Han China was.)

It's set in space, isn't it? So why do you want to have maps with animals and trees?

Removing is more work than adding, though it shouldn't be too difficult per se. Basically you have to remove all occurrences of the resource types you don't want to have. Try starting with the following: gui/common/setup_resources.xml gui/text/tips.DELETED simulation/data/auras.DELETED simulation/data/cheats.DELETED simulation/data/civs.DELETED simulation/data/resources.DELETED simulation/data/resources/one.json simulation/data/resources/other.json simulation/data/technologies.DELETED simulation/templates.DELETED

Actually Rouen has been renamed to Ratumacos and is a random map, as is Marmara:

Yes, you can see which technologies are being research (globally), but you can't see which structures are researching or training something. This thread is about adding animations so you can see if a structure is busy. Simply adding a production status bar would serve the same purpose, be possibly clearer, and would work for all entities without having to add animations for every actor.

What do you mean exactly?

How about a production/research/training status bar, similar to the pack/unpack bar of artillery?

Currently 0 A.D.'s city walls are a bit simplistic: they are symmetrical (the inside mirrors the outside) and the wall segments run from the centre of one wall tower to the centre of the next. In reality, city walls typically wouldn't have battlements on the inside and wall towers/bastions would be on the outside. Also, the latter would usually be massive up to the parapat level of the wall segments and wouldn't have doors at the bottom or stairs inside (contrary to border forts (0 A.D.'s fortresses) or outposts (0 A.D.'s towers), which are hollow on the inside). Being able to build city walls with a clear city-side and country-side in 0 A.D. would be a nice improvement. @LordGood, @Stan`.

Yes, I can understand that, however, you currently enlarge the entire minimap panel with all gui elements, rather than just only the map itself.

The idea is nice, but enlarging the gui elements (ring, buttons, empty corners) looks really ugly in game. Is it possible to display only the large map itself, without the gui elements? Also, Alt+M (for map) or something might be easier to memorize than Shift+Tab. For comparison, Ctrl+B toggles the barter window and Alt+Shift+T the structure tree.

You can define some values as to how the projectile moves, I believe, but not how the projectile itself looks. At least when comparing the quinquereme and trireme templates, I saw nothing to explain why one shoots large stones and the other just arrows. It seems to be defined in the actor files, e.g. https://trac.wildfiregames.com/browser/ps/trunk/binaries/data/mods/public/art/actors/structures/ptolemies/quinquereme.xml

Those look good! Nonetheless, there is space for improvement: The power of torsion engines (i.e. the force by which the projectile is launched) is proportional to the thickness/mass/volume of the string. To be able to shoot a rock, one needs a massive string, say at least a hand in diameter, whereas in those actors the string of the largest actor seems visibly just as thin as one of the smallest scorpion. Consequently, the larger engines would also have much thicker arms, to prevent them from snapping. The largest has two wheels on each side, operated by one man each, which looks a bit ugly and unnecessary. It would be better if two men would turn one wheel. Furthermore, there will need to be more differently sized packed artillery actors, with the correct number of men. Also, could you show all artillery, from small to large? The smallest stone-thrower should be visibly larger than the largest bolt-shooter (and have a larger crew). Given their size, towers would typically be unable to host anything larger than a scorpion (small bolt-shooter) and should thus have similar projectiles, not large rocks or fireballs. Only exceptionally large wall towers, bastions, or fortresses might have space for a small or medium stone-thrower. Off-topic, it would be nice if the projectile actor could be defined in the templates, rather than in the art files, to improve modifiability, e.g. a Briton fortress firing sling stones or an Iberian tower javelins.

So I had to look a couple of times before I noticed what's new. I agree it's visually pleasing, though I have a few concerns. First of all, why only the blacksmith's? Either all structures researching or training something ought to have animations, or none at all. Secondly, how does it affect performance? Furthermore, as you pointed out already, if structures have animations, then that reveals information to other players; is that desirable? And finally, does the AI take into account which enemy structures are researching something. While those animations certainly look nice, it might be better to put them into a mod, rather than making it the default for 0 A.D.

For the spotted hyena (Crocuta crocuta), the following images might be helpful: However, the spotted hyena lives outside the area covered by 0 A.D.'s civilizations: So if you have time and enthousiasm left when the spotted hyena is finished, it would be nice if you could also create the striped hyena (Hyaena hyaena), which fits in 0 A.D.'s area: And if you're not bored then, maybe adding the other two hyena species for completeness (in case someone want to make a “Zoo Tycoon” mod) would be nice as well. The aardwolf (Proteles cristata): And the brown hyena (Hyaena brunnea):

How many different artillery actors do you currently have?

Triggered by @Alexandermb's recent activity, I revisited artillery in my 0abc mod and organized the templates as follows: template_unit_siege_boltshooter.xml template_unit_siege_boltshooter_large.xml template_unit_siege_boltshooter_medium.xml template_unit_siege_boltshooter_small.xml template_unit_siege_stonethrower.xml template_unit_siege_stonethrower_large.xml template_unit_siege_stonethrower_medium.xml template_unit_siege_stonethrower_small.xml bolt-shooter : small , medium , large per shot: pierce damage : 50 , 75 , 100 thrust damage : 30 , 45 , 60 metal cost : 2 , 3 , 4 unit cost: iron : 50 , 75 , 100 wood : 100 , 150 , 200 time : 60 , 70 , 80 miscellaneous: garrison size : 4 , 6 , 8 health : 100 , 150 , 200 pack time : 4 , 6 , 8 upkeep per second: silver : 0.03 , 0.04 , 0.05 food : 0.06 , 0.08 , 0.10 stone-thrower : small , medium , large per shot: crush damage : 90 , 120 , 180 stone cost : 3 , 4 , 6 unit cost: iron : 90 , 120 , 180 wood : 180 , 240 , 360 time : 90 , 100 , 120 miscellaneous: garrison size : 9 , 12 , 18 health : 180 , 240 , 360 pack time : 9 , 10 , 12 upkeep per second: silver : 0.06 , 0.08 , 0.12 food : 0.09 , 0.12 , 0.18 (Other stats are equal for different sizes.)

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/BuildInstructions#Running1

They look nice! Light means bolt-shooter and heavy means stone-thrower?

True, but there was quite some time between the wars in which those engines were obtained and the wars in which they were used. It's similar to the example of Scipio (a few posts above), who seized a large number of artillery when capturing Carthago Nova and used those a few years later when about to besiege Carthago itself. However, artillery being captured, turned around in the heat of battle, and starting firing on the troops of its previous owners? Unlikely. In some earlier alpha, rams were capturable, but that was later reverted. I think it makes sense to have capturable structures but uncapturable units. Gameplay changes should probably be discussed somewhere else, though.

Long answer: artillery consisted of two parts: the base and the engine. The base is fixed, the engine could be rotated and be elevated, regardless of type; bolt-shooters operated at angles from 30° (maximum range) to 0° (maximum impact), stone-throwers from 45° (maximum range) to 0° (maximum impact). Short answer: having all bolt-shooters point horizontally forward and all stone-throwers diagonally is a simplification I don't mind. What I would like (gameplay; can be discussed later) is the following: all siege engines are uncapturable; they require specialists to operate and killing the crew makes them useless remove splash damage bolt-shooters are expensive, accurate, very long range, pure pierce damage weapons very effective against soldiers, but not against structures stone-throwers are very expensive, long range, pure crush damage weapons effective against siege engines and structures There would be different calibres/sizes of both types and civilizations would have a subset, but none would have all. Currently (A23) I believe there are the following actors, from small to large: gastraphetes (crossbowman) scorpio polybolos oxybeles lithobolos cart ballista rome ballista However, I lost track of what you're doing in this thread, so if you've added any new ones, please insert them in the list. For me, it's easier to consider the size of the projectiles, rather than the engines. Ideally, I'd like to see the following: hand-held gastraphetes: one-span (23 cm) small bolt-shooter/scorpio: one-cubit (46 cm) medium bolt-shooter/scorpio/oxybeles: three-span (69 cm) large bolt-shooter/oxybeles: two-cubit (92 cm) i.e. a 1:2:3:4 projectile size ratio. (For the polybolos, whichever projectile size seems most appropiate; I consider the polybolos an unimportant extra, like the Theban fireraiser.) All bolt-shooters should have a visible crew of two, stone-throwers more. For the stone-throwers (60 mina = 1 talent = 26 kg): [maybe] small stone-thrower: 15 mina = 0.25 talent = 6.5 kg according to ancient sources, the preferred size for targetting enemy troops from city walls and towers medium stone-thrower (current lithobolos?): 30 mina = 0.50 talent = 13 kg according to ancient sources, the preferred size for destroying ordinary siege towers, battering rams, tortoises, galleries, palisades, etc. [maybe] medium-large stone-thrower (current cart ballista): 40 mina = 0.67 talent = 17.5 kg large stone-thrower (current rome ballista?): 60 mina = 1 talent = 26 kg according to ancient sources, the preferrred size for toppling city walls and serious fortifications [maybe] huge stone-thrower (new one?): 90 mina = 1.5 talent = 39 kg The “maybe”s I consider unnecessary but nice to have. Concerning the huge one, three-talent or above stone-throwers are occassionally mentioned in ancient texts, but they were rare; realistically 1.5 talent appears to be the largest somewhat common size, based on actual projectile finds. Also note that mass is proportional to volume, hence r³, so heavier stones would only look slightly larger. [EDIT] Let's say a round 1 kg stone has a diameter of 10.0 cm, then a round 15 mina stone would have a diameter of 18.7 cm, 30 mina 23.6 cm, 60 mina 29.7 cm, and 90 mina 34.0 cm. The actual numbers are irrelevant, but the ratios give some idea (to put it differently, a 1 : 1.26 : 1.59 : 1.82 projectile diameter ratio). Indeed, there is no need for variants. Just three sizes of bolt-shooters and three stone-throwers would be enough. Currently most actors are visibly torsion engines (two separate arms and in between a hole in front for the projectile). However, the current oxybeles is the exception: it's a non-torsion crossbow, basically a large gastraphetes, which is fine, because this was the commonest type in the 4th C BC; they were no longer used from the 3rd C BC onwards, though. So if you intend to remake something, a torsion oxybeles of the same size as the current crossbow oxybeles would be nice to have (but also keep the current one).