Grapjas

I haven't tried it myself, so I'm not sure what's your best option. Pinging @Stan`

I think you can do it, i'll PM you (pretty busy this weekend though).

@Darkcity do you know how to make a patch? Otherwise it will be all talk but no action like many other discussions. If not you could learn how to if you want. EDIT: if you're on windows i can help you out.

You eniterely missed the point. You cant do this: Just by the sheer amount of daily downloads of mods on mod.io that you never see (or extremely rarely) being played online tells me more than enough. On a good day it can surpass the number of online people in the lobby. The difference is, the lobby mainly consists of the same returning players while number of mod downloads are likely new people. Just to provide you a statistic. It's not annoying if it's rewarding. My point is, you're purely talking from a competitive perspective while many people don't play the game competitively. It often feels like the entire game gets build around the 1% of the (loudest) playerbase. Back on subject, i agree that buffing siege if you garrison them is the very least thing that can be done to make them more interesting.

@chrstgtr Well instead of needing to micro 5 rams, you could maybe now do it with 2 decked out rams dealing more damage and who move faster. You can now also prepare siege if you are capped at the pop limit. No need to wait for that new cata after waiting you are not at pop cap anymore, it's simply already there. It can be sniped, but isn't RTS about finding smart ways to defeat your enemy? Or maybe you have 5 rams and you want to attack the enemy, but in the middle you come across an enemy army. Thats 15 pop you are missing and who are unable to fight. With these changes you can pop them out and have them reinforce your army to fight. I would like to note again that far more players play the game at a slower pace and mostly in singleplayer/LAN envoirements and probably have been irritated about changes for the sake of MP balance, too.

Certainly can be changed if needed. Ballista's needed up to 8 people to function, i think a catapult wouldn't be far off. I think bolt shooters were ideally a 2 man job at least but can't find a good source really. If i'm not mistaken, bolt shooters were ballista's too just of a different caliber. Maybe the historians know more about this.

Siege towers should make you able to unload units over walls imo. When clicking unload you should be prompted with a choice where to with a simple area highlight around the mouse pos. But an increased capture rate makes sense too. Imo rams need bonus attack damage against gates and catas need their splash damage back.

I much like the idea and i think it will bring interesting new gameplay to the table. Instead of adjusting damage values i think it may be more logical to only touch movement speed and attack speed values with the exception of the ram. I think it'll be fine honestly it not costing population because siege is still expensive and it indeed technically still costs pop to be able to effeciently use them.

Interesting that APU's are by far the most used among 0AD players. Not sure how they perform in 0AD but i'd say thats something to consider for anyone wanting to improve the graphics of the game, as they are most likely to be the bottlenecks.

What are the specs? Steam hardware surveys can be interesting to see what is 'common' hardware these days and it's honestly not bad at all in 2022. @Stan` does 0AD use LOD?

How does one get featured there?

Petra needs some work indeed, but maybe you'll have more fun if you up the difficulty. In regards to formations, they are mostly used to gather units that are far away sprint to a certain location, reducing the chance to get hit in the process. So it's more of a dancing mechanic. It's also useful if you have slow units in your army, so that they won't be left behind because they are likely your meatshield. 0 A.D. | A free, open-source game of ancient warfare (play0ad.com)

This is the final stand i meant. The other source mentions he defended himself and threw back the javs that were thrown towards him but not that he made any kills. I guess the sources fullfill each other then.

So he actually didn't kill anyone in that final stand like Wiki says? He just held his ground very well considering all circumstances.

Maybe the historians know something heroic about these 2 and we can give them abilities instead of an aura. @Genava55 @Ultimate Aurelian@Thorfinn the Shallow Minded Thought for Aegis 3: he becomes stronger the more isolated he is from allies. (since he managed to still kill some while being alone) OR Increased attack while being below 50%(?) hp.

No thanks, heroes have to much health as is. Be more creative.

He has bonus health IIRC nvm he doesn't, the other one i'm not sure.

XML.Actor – Wildfire Games and Actors – Wildfire Games may be of help. You need to add animations to the capes aswell IIRC. Yup. Those are the animations when a unit promotes and when a unit dies respectively, i think.

I'd take that caveat gladly opposed to no blocking at all. It would be interesting to see and test what the performance hit would actually be instead of theorising about it. But i don't know C++ so i need someone to join me on that journey. Yup, and theres a decent amount of shooters who do HitReg instead of ballistic hits.

What if there would be another function added called ExecuteLinearQueryPos(startPos, endPos) to Rangemanager? Returning true immediately and stop searching if it found anything. Much alike the ExecuteQueryAroundPos we already have but that one is checking in radius. To get the positions you can simply use the positions that are already calculated in the PerformAttack function. And while at it, you can probably redirect the damage to the unit/building in the way instead there too.

I have bent my head over this before too. IIRC projectiles do have an entity ID, just not sure what you can do with it other than visually delete them. But if i understand @Stan` correctly, even if you got them to visually delete before it hits the intended unit, the engine will still register it as a hit. Best way i think would be to check for any entity between the unit and the target along the fly path and if true, stop checking and deal the damage to that unit/building instead. But Stan is probably right and will be costly in performance.

Report them for wallhacking.

Thanks for reporting : ) Feeling a little under the weather? I'll show myself out

Shouldn't be that hard to implement this feature, code wise. I would do it like alre suggests, a button you can click when you select your men. With the code you would get all entities of the e.g. Barracks class and store it to a variable. Calculate in a loop which one is closest and order them to garrison to it or just stand near it (which they automatically do if the building is full). You can also send them to the next barrack if full but that might work out against you if you don't pay attention and have multiple bases. wHy NoT Do iT YoUrSeLf?! Because i don't necessarily want this feature I'd say go to phab and make a patch for it and if you don't know how to this wiki is a start. In regards to unreachable terrain, i'm not sure if there is a function in place already to check that. IIRC theres not and units will go back and forth trying to reach that terrain. Haven't played in a bit though.

There are corrupt human beings, but not all human beings are corrupt, is my point. But we're getting off topic i guess ( my fault ) and i honestly have nothing to add.