Jump to content

Boudica

Community Members
  • Posts

    287
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by Boudica

  1. 6 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

    I've never heard of any script which can do what you describe.  0AD executes 5 turns per second (less if there is lag) so I really don't see the point of your 500 APM. Plus, a good build order and knowing when to do what is more effective than spam clicking on your units. 

    I mentioned "snipe script" to mock JC, who accuses StockFish of using "snipe scripts" whenever he loses to fish. Didn't expect you to fall for the same thing.

    You seem to be playing along my 1900 car analogy pretty well, so I'll translate what you're saying: "I've never seen a car that can outrun a horse. And the distances people usually travel aren't even that long, so I see no point of going any faster. Don't fall for people trying to tell you that a car helped them get something done. Being a good horse rider will always beat ownership of any car."

    Just for your information, the turn length really has little relevance here. That's just like a random fact you added to make what you're writing seem more informed, but it did the opposite. 500 APM is just above eight actions per second. It's more than a normal player would be capable of, but not even high enough if you really wanted to control all units in a fight individually. A turn doesn't restrict you to only one command, if that's something that also needs to be mentioned here.

    So no, I'm not "falling" for anything here. And whether or not you can imagine something done is not the relevant part here. You basically suggest to make this game a mod writing competition.

    6 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

    I firmly believe that Atrik's ProGUI cannot be considered a cheat. 

    (based on latest version in May 2023)

    You see, I haven't even been talking about the current state of a specific mod, that seems what you fail to understand here. But this ungrounded believe you expressed here only invites the question when a mod might start to be considered a cheat if not now. So are you going to be updating us with each new release if we're cheating yet or not? As if you dismiss the whole discussion about rules and try to replace it with whatever just fits you at the moment.

  2. 7 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

    lol kids, pros unzip their public.zip and edit straight away. No mods.

    Congratulations on the third place among people who have said this thing in this thread. Furthermore, you've also won the a special award for naming the exact steps that could help cheaters cheat better.

    7 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

    All those arguments about snipe scripts and autoboom... Let's put it it this way: all such knavish tricks are insignificant in front of a pro player with true skills. 

    You can install whatever fancy mod but I will still boom faster than you (but with my cube trees of AbstractGUI of course) ;) 

    So these cheat scripts aren't really important. Fish/Irland/FallOut is OP regardless of whether he uses snipe script or not. A nub with some whacky script is still a nub.

    Therefore, kids, relax and play! Don't let cheaters scare you away.

    And... I see you are also putting yourself into the group of foolish folks who try to claim that mods don't even make a difference. It's a surprise that this is coming from someone like you, to be honest. It feels like hearing 1900 people bash the novel motor car idea because a horse is always a horse and it won't break down on the way.

    I don't even feel like going much deeper into the discussion (and give free ideas to cheaters), because it just seems super obvious. No player can control every unit in every turn independently, but a mod can. Are you going to claim that getting a free 500 of precise APM with possibly no overkill ever is just an insignificant, minor convenience?

    I don't really know who the "kid" is here now. I start to suspect that people talking like this might be just those wanting to use a mod to get an unfair advantage themselves, so they can finally be good and go challenge borg- (as long as he is without the mod, that is). It's never been like "Hey, Boudica, I've been testing this new mod that does eco for me, wanna try to play like this?". No. They preferably even create a smurf account and casually ask you to play rated. And this kind of dishonesty is what makes me lose any respect to those. Understand that I'm not scared, it's just contempt.

    • Confused 1
  3. 2 hours ago, G.O.A.T said:

    We can only rely on fairness of players - If i look back to smurfs wall project... we can see it was even hard for players to avoid it (many had different reason some good some questionable)... we can conclude cheating is essential element of the game.  There for maybe 4v4 make more sense.... expecting not everyone will have access to best "tools" 

    Maybe the Olympics should only have team sports because not every participant has access to top-tier drugs, thus making the game fair. Cheating has been an essential part of sports anyway, so why hate on the swimmers just because they hang onto a water scooter, or runners who decide to ride a motorcycle. You should realize that motorcycles have been known to improve the quality of life in cities with dense traffic.

    End of sarcasm. And with no due respect, your post must be the greatest piece of garbage I've ever encountered on the forums. I really lack respect for people who try to defend cheating (using humorously flawed logic, I must add), and I will stand for anyone who gets called a hater for calling out cheaters.

    P.S.: Your rule enforcement ideas are useless, which is the real reason why they haven't been implemented. There still are usable methods to detect various types of cheating. The real problem is people like you who try to justify cheating and make it seem like a non-issue.

    • Haha 1
  4. A similar request has been made in the past. The thing is that only a part of the developer team is able to make performance improvements. It's not the case that adding content is at the expense of performance tuning. Also, people are ungrateful, so I'm sure they would only be like "the development is stalled, there are no new features".

    Anyway, I can't say I share the same experience regarding the performance. I noticed no performance changes since A25 (on my older laptop with an integrated GPU). Maybe my game already was laggy before. :victory:

    • Like 4
  5. I enjoyed reading more about the recent changes on that matter. The commercial games employ techniques to mask the actual command delay, even though the actual delay also can be lower as wraitii described it. You would usually start animating the units immediately and then smoothe their visual position into the actual one. We could probably do something like that.

    • Like 1
  6. I checked for myself and the opening statement isn't even right. The replay does get saved after a rejoin. Do some research before you start saying stuff.

    So I suppose that when you claim it worked in A25, that's also going to be false.

    2 hours ago, Boudica said:

    It would be different if the game state after a rejoin would also be stored, but unless something has changed, that isn't the case.

     

  7. Sorry, vinme, but I think I made myself very clear in the followup comment. Why write a lengthy response like this when you're only arguing with a straw man?

    Of course, I am not opposing the usefulness of watching partial replays. I used the word replay to mean replay files, which is both in accordance with how you used the word in the title and pretty obvious unless you immediately jump to conclusion that I must be asking something trivial and dumb.

    The fact is I never used to be able to view or replay any replay files that don't start from "command 0". If you claim it's something that has worked for you, perhaps there is something wrong with my game. Anyway, the game state won't appear out of nowhere and I didn't see it get stored after a rejoin last time I checked that.

  8. I was just referring to the fact that the replay files without a beginning could not be used to actually replay the game because the initial state of such replay is not available. You only have player commands since a specific time, but those are of no use if you don't know which entities these are referring to. Replay files could be merged provided that there is no gap. Perhaps if you only quit and rejoin while the game is paused. It would be different if the game state after a rejoin would also be stored, but unless something has changed, that isn't the case.

    • Thanks 1
  9. 9 hours ago, m7600 said:

    Lol. Let me rephrase that: I take it that you're the humorless guy 'round these parts?

    I guess I'll just have to explain the obvious. What I said before was to your point. In other words, you were right, attack move doesn't increase the movement speed of the units. I find it odd that someone like you who fancies themselves as a master debater couldn't see that.

    And yes, looking at the code (or script) is the best way to settle a debate about number crunching. What's the alternative? To look at the game and just try to see if the units move faster or not? Sounds less exact than just looking at the actual functions and numbers, IMHO.

    So now you're trying to rephrase your condescending post as a joke? Now that might be something that needs explaining.

    Anyway, the obvious didn't really need to be explained. One reason is that we had already easily and conveniently tested what we needed before you entered the discussion. But the main reason is that your contribution didn't really show more than that you weren't able to find anything related in the code. That is not the better or more exact way because... there could be something somewhere else in the code, right? How about instead of explaining the obvious you just focus on understanding the explicitly stated first?

    See how Freagarach contributed information about the code. Noticed any difference? Focus on how he introduced his post. That is a fun introduction, but doesn't call other people names and he only makes fun of himself. Then he references specific code parts to support his written point. Isn't it the opposite of just randomly linking the first file that had attack-move in it and acting smart about it? Take notes.

  10. 25 minutes ago, m7600 said:

    I take it that you're the quality control guy 'round these parts?

    Do you like labels a lot? If the fact that you make a false statement and I correct makes me a "quality control guy", then yes, I probably am a quality control guy.

    I was talking about the XML files (but also the code that works with them). And what is your point now? That we have to go through the entire codebase to make sure there is nothing that changes the unit speed in our case? And you are trying to push this idea as the best way to settle a debate?

    I was treating you nicely when I called that "bad wording" instead of just a bad idea introduced by a wrong statement. And I see you are now trying to make this about myself, while it was your suggestion that was just bad. Yes, insert some irrelevant quotes instead of any reflection.

     

    • Like 1
  11. 39 minutes ago, m7600 said:

    The best way to settle debates such as this one is to just look at the code (or the script, in this case). Just saying.

    Attack-move can be found in the file unit_actions.js, specifically in the lines 97-148. If you look at those lines, there is nothing there that indicates that attack-move changes the speed of the unit, in any way.

    Nice tip, but not a good wording. As if you prove right there that it wasn't the best way to settle the debate. First of all, it requires both parties to understand the code. Second, you can't just take one snippet like this and post it as a proof. The specific values for speed etc. are composed from templates from various places. This snippet doesn't even define what the individual commands do.

  12. I must say I actually appreciate trying to support your point with a video. That shows you don't intend to spread misinformation. I briefly tested what you initially claimed, even though I was pretty sure I know what the game does. Well, alre already explains what is happening there. Perhaps the walking animation is a bit confusing specifically with these Iberian soldiers, but this really seems to be the walking speed. I also tried to test if there is a speed difference between units with and without resources, and I noticed no difference.

    So like alre said, the animation with a sword belongs to the attack move (when the unit pauses it's movement to first attack any nearby units or structures). And the carried resources are still seen in the bottom pannel and they even reappear when you order a normal move. The only time the resources get dropped is when you start gathering a resource of a different type.

     

    • Like 1
  13. 3 hours ago, rollieoo said:

    Actually I noticed different behavior the other day.

    You didn't notice a different behavior. And no, it's not a bug when a unit with a passive stance doesn't automatically attack.

    1 hour ago, rossenburg said:

    units run or walk faster when they are not carrying resources or when they are passive. You can hold ctrl + right-click to set to passive , in this case the units will discard any resources and start attacking anything nearby ( enemies precisely ). You can do the same thing when theres no enemies and they will run instead of walking even when they are holding resources. Hope this answers your question ::cheers:

    It doesn't answer the question because you are making stuff up.

  14. Some extra flare message suggestions (based on experience):

    1. Look where I just suicided my entire army because it's now your problem.
    2. The army you warned me about via the chat really came to where you said it's coming.
    3. I noticed some enemy cavalry, but I only make women, so if you don't come deal with it all by yourself now, I'm going to quit and it's your fault.
    4. I am just flaring again to help you answer your questions as to what my previous flare was supposed to mean.
    • Haha 5
  15. You're right about the women because those are units with a default passive stance. A passive stance unit only starts running once it is actually attacked and hit, but the exact behavior also depends on the command it is following at that time. The attacking unit also starts running when hitting and following a passive unit.

    Other than women, healers are also passive by default. If you actually set soldiers to passive, they will act the same too. Anyway, you can still order a passive unit to attack an enemy unit (if it is capable of attacking), and the attack will take precedence over running away. When a unit is working on an economic task, it will try to run away when attacked but then return to that task.

    • Thanks 1
  16. While I like these suggestions for improvement, reading all this just makes me want to play a nice regicide. I wonder how many times destroying a CC with the hero elephant has been done successfully. Almost every time I saw someone going for that, including myself, the elephant hero died in the process. It sure can work with good support from your allies, but that rarely happens.

  17. You are right. You could actually try killing the bear in this situation. Or briefly walk away with the majority of builders to let the bear out. When you place a building on a unit and try to start building, the unit tries to leave the space to allow the construction to actually start. One problem is that units like chicken or sheep move rather slowly, so it can take time for them to leave. Another problem is when the workers block the way out as is your case. Killing the animal will allow to start building over it, but you won't be able to collect any meat anymore. A bear is actually a great food boost early into the game, so it's mostly better to keep it if possible.

  18. I could imagine giving new players the option to become a "certified noob" and get a nice badge next to their name. To make this realistically work, we'd again probably need an automated hosting service. I kind of doubt a person would care to keep reviewing noob games, but I might be wrong.

    It might be a nice idea for a small hobby project to set this up. Remind me to look into this when I retire. It could kind of look like a special campaign game you could play in the multiplayer lobby when you want. A bot would keep track of your progress and make it visible to others in the form of badges or other. Sounds like fun to me.

    (Edit) A few ideas on how the campaigns might look like:

    • Survive for X minutes on the Survival map. Gives you a bronze silver or gold Defender badge, depending on how long you can hold.
    • The rush challenge. A small map with scattered groups of enemy soldiers. Your goal is to make a decent attacking army early and clear the map within a time limit. Get various Rusher badges, depending on how fast you can clear the map.
    • The boom challenge. Get a Boomer badge depending on how fast you can reach a certain population number.
    • The hunter challenge. Lure as many animals and gather as much food as possible within a time limit.

    I mean, just keeping track of these results would make nice additional leaderboards. I've often heard people boast about how fast they can grow or something, so imagine there is an official, automatically managed leaderboard for that. What do you think?

    • Like 1
  19. I regret that I wasn't very active during the test playing. Anyway, I just gave the new release a try and... wow, the game is now so much better! So smooth, clean, calming and beautiful. You've really done a lot of work during those past two years. I usually had to get used to each new release, but this just one just instantly feels better.

    Also thank you for the auto-training feature. It's a lifesaver for lazy players like me. I won't longer throw games just because I don't feel like batching new units to be trained.

    I wasn't closely following the development, so I missed that there was this much going on. I'm quite amazed, honestly.

    38 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

    Many thanks to all the devs! Can confirm that A25 is readily available for Arch Linux now:

    Interesting, I did

    pacman -Suy on Manjaro

    and I can't still see it there. Anyway, I use the swap version, so running

    snap switch 0ad --channel=latest/beta

    did the trick for me.

    • Like 4
×
×
  • Create New...