Jump to content

Grapjas

Community Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    470

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Grapjas

  4. Actor Files - A few questions

    in Game Modification

    Posted · Edited by Grapjas

    35 minutes ago, LordStark said:

    1. Is there a list of all the possible attach points somewhere? I am also unclear on the relevance of "<variant frequency="1" name="Idle"/>"

    XML.Actor – Wildfire Games and Actors – Wildfire Games may be of help.

    35 minutes ago, LordStark said:

    2. Why is it that sometimes when I add something like a cape to a unit it does not sit correctly? 

    You need to add animations to the capes aswell IIRC. 

    35 minutes ago, LordStark said:

    My interpretation is that it is telling the rider to:

    A. Use a certain animation called "attack_slaughter_shield_hele" when it kills a deer/chicken/wolf etc etc

    B. Use a specific animation called "gather_meat" when gathering meat from the animal the rider killed.

    Yup.

    35 minutes ago, LordStark said:

    promotion_shield and death_shield

    Those are the animations when a unit promotes and when a unit dies respectively, i think.

  5. Shooting through walls - how do I stop this?

    in Game Modification

    Posted · Edited by Grapjas

    30 minutes ago, smiley said:

    with the caveat that buildings placed and constructed after the projectile was launched would not block.

    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.

    30 minutes ago, smiley said:

    AoE4 have even more simplified ranged attacks by making them always hit

    Yup, and theres a decent amount of shooters who do HitReg instead of ballistic hits.

  6. Shooting through walls - how do I stop this?

    in Game Modification

    Posted

    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.

  7. Shooting through walls - how do I stop this?

    in Game Modification

    Posted

    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. 

    • Like 1

  10. A "retreat" capability should be added to soldiers.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Grapjas

    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 :P

    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.

    • Thanks 1

  13. Looking back on the balancing strategy

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    I think being open sourced is both a blessing and a curse. In the end you need someONE (or at least a very small group like 3 ppl, this way you always have either min 2 opposed or in favor) taking the lead and put down the hammer on what gets into the game. The more people that will join the discussions, the harder it will be to agree to something and it will develop into endless debates (just look at politcs, lol). But it's a difficult task indeed for one person to carry that weight. And you will lose and gain people along the way regardless.

    I agree with @azayrahmad that a proper design document needs to be in place and enforced, for people that are willing to contribute. But when it comes new ideas, it's best to have one person (or the small team) in the lead making those final calls imo.

    • Like 2

  14. Two-Gendered Citizens Mod (Please Test!)

    in Game Modification

    Posted

    10 hours ago, AIEND said:

    Now there are women who farm, civic infantry who log wood, mine metal and stone, civic cavalry who hunt, mercenary infantry who can build buildings but can't gather resources, mercenary cavalry and champions who can 't gather resources or build buildings.

    I think the way the roles are divided are pretty good and logical and is something that makes 0AD more unique imo. It takes some time to learn the differences for new players but learning is not a bad thing. You wouldn't hire a mercenary to collect wood, they are hired to fight. Champions are proper combat units, surely you wouldn't send your best trained men to work in a mine. You would send lower class citizens to do that job. Not saying it's perfect though but i think the role dividing for units should stay.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  15. Two-Gendered Citizens Mod (Please Test!)

    in Game Modification

    Posted

    7 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

    btw Did AoE3 have any impact at all? I'm barely aware it exists, because there's AoE4 and bc it's the new shtuff there's talk about it. But if I'm not mistaken 2 is still much more a thing than 3.

    I personally much prefer AOE3 over 2, mainly because 2 is really chaotic and the isometric view is horrible imo. The combat feels much nicer in 3 aswell. But yes, it was a small ripple compared to AOE2.

    • Like 2

  18. AoE 2 Expansion: Indian Dynasties similarities to 0ad

    in Introductions & Off-Topic Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, LetswaveaBook said:

    I think you need to accept that the product will be unrealistic if you have a game where cavalry and elephant´s can´t move and attack at the same time.

    I mean it's not impossible just hasn't been done yet. IIRC there was work on it, just need animators to beautify it. Just because something isn't in the game doesn't mean you need to throw every realistic or logical thing out the window. It also just shows that not a whole lot of people are actually coding/contributing to the game.

    2 hours ago, Fabius said:

    Do that and you'll see much more elephant doom stacks than currently, especially as units tend to overlap and any kind of splash damage changes things considerably. Still its a good idea :) 

    There are a number of ways to balance this, e.g. limit the max number of targets it can splash hit to something like 3, and lower the damage against the units that were indirectly hit (maybe 1/2 of the direct damage). 

  21. All Civilizations are my favorite.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    26 minutes ago, Ultimate Aurelian said:

    The Extraordinarii were recruited exclusively from Rome's Itallic allies

    I see. But I said promoted into centurions anyway though.

    Obviously would need a critical eye from the historians team but I'm sure each civ could get a champion promotion out of some soldier types for that civ. 

    Would be disappointing if only Romans got this feature imo, wether its the one from Grapejuice or the one from DE.

    • Like 1

  23. All Civilizations are my favorite.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Grapjas

    20 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

    This was discussed before. It would be virtually impossible to do in competitive games for most melee units. The exception would be games where skill isn't close (i.e., not competitive) or with skirati (units that get a 2 rank head start).

    Well teamgames are a thing too. Just requires you to play differently if your goal is to have your units promote to champions. If competitive won't be able to achieve units getting to 4th rank (seriously doubt it though)- no loss no gain i guess.

    Skiritai won't get to champions because spartans don't have champion swordsman type unit.

    And there are also ranged units that would be able to promote to champions if that type of unit exists for the civ. Kushite archers to noble archers for example.

    • Like 1

  24. All Civilizations are my favorite.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Grapjas

    33 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    So, for Romans, I was thinking of making a patch to where you can promote the Elite Swordsman and the Elite Spearman to Centurion (4th) rank for a cost. Maybe limit it to a max of 10 or something.

    How about letting soldiers promote to champions (4th rank) the normal way if the civ has the same type for it in the roster?  (grapejuiceTM)

    So swordsman to centurion, Spartan spearmen to spartiates etc. It makes sense for experienced soldiers to become champions. It wouldn't be that easy to achieve either, depending on the game ofc.

    Gives more incentive to be savvy with your soldiers.

    • Like 2

  25. All Civilizations are my favorite.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Grapjas

    55 minutes ago, PyrrhicVictoryGuy said:

    Nope they were worn on the right side because the geometry of the scutum would interfere  with the drawing of the sword. Well thats the common explanation but it could a fashion thing, like wearing the left greave only.

    This discussion is pretty interesting. it is noted that romans typically wore their sword on the right side seemingly regardless of what hand you are fighting with. However it's also noted that centurions wore it on the left side, of which the image i quoted is about.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...