Dakara

I think that a building such as the Civic Center or military training structures, when properly defended (with at least half of their garrison capacity filled), should be almost impossible to capture in Phase 3—except in cases of an overwhelming numerical difference, for example at least a 1-to-15 ratio (10 defenders against 150 attackers, not counting champions or mercenaries). The idea is to avoid capture becoming the “default option,” and instead make destruction through units or siege weapons the more realistic and relevant solution. Of course, there’s always the option of heavily damaging a building to force the garrison out before attempting to capture it. On the other hand, I think it would be interesting to keep a moderate capture speed depending on the type of building: Light civilian buildings or watchtowers could still be captured quite quickly, as they are now. Un-upgraded towers could resist capture at about a 1-to-5 ratio (e.g., 3 defenders vs. 15 attackers), while upgraded towers could resist at about a 1-to-10 ratio (5 defenders vs. 50 attackers), with capture becoming much slower beyond that. Military buildings without defenders should still be capturable, but they ought to resist better. We just need to find the right balance so that capturing them isn’t a trivial action but more of a time sink for the attacker.

Dans un monde vidéoludique saturé de titres standardisés, produits en série et bourrés de microtransactions, il existe un jeu qui rappelle ce que jouer veut vraiment dire : 0 A.D.. Oui, ce RTS open source est bien plus qu’un simple divertissement. C’est une déclaration, un manifeste en acte : on peut créer un jeu exigeant, beau, riche, sans céder aux logiques commerciales. Et c’est précisément pour cela que je l’aime. Il est à la fois traditionnel et moderne. Je joue aux RTS depuis longtemps. Ce genre est le plus noble du jeu vidéo : il met l’intelligence au centre. Pas de script figé, pas de rails à suivre. Seulement un champ de bataille, des ressources limitées, et la liberté totale de construire sa victoire ou de creuser sa défaite. Un bon RTS, c’est un duel d’esprit, un ballet de décisions prises à la seconde, une tension où l’on doit tout équilibrer : économie, défense, expansion, attaque. C’est brut, c’est exigeant, c’est pur. Et j'aime particulièrement ce jeu car le socle de connaissance est limité et la micro-gestion pas trop exigeante. 0 A.D. incarne cette essence. Il ne cherche pas à séduire par du clinquant, mais par sa profondeur. Il fait renaître des civilisations entières, les dote de leurs spécificités, et les oppose dans des batailles qui respirent l’authenticité. Jouer Sparte ou Carthage n’est pas un simple skin différent : c’est une expérience stratégique unique. Là où d’autres jeux capitalisent sur l’instantanéité, 0 A.D. rappelle qu’un RTS doit se construire sur la diversité, la patience et l’équilibre. Mais ce qui le distingue radicalement, c’est sa communauté. Pas de grands studios derrière, pas de budgets marketing colossaux. Seulement des passionnés, bénévoles, qui bâtissent ce jeu pièce par pièce. Voilà la vraie révolution. Dans un secteur où tout semble dicté par le profit, 0 A.D. prouve qu’on peut faire autrement : coopérer, partager, créer ensemble. Ici, les joueurs ne sont pas réduits au rôle de consommateurs. Ils deviennent des contributeurs, des voix qui comptent. Et cette communauté, je la revendique. Elle est le cœur battant du projet. Quand un bug est corrigé, quand une mise à jour sort, ce n’est pas une opération commerciale, c’est une victoire collective. On sent que le jeu évolue parce que des gens, aux quatre coins du monde, y ont cru et y croient encore. Ce n’est pas une entreprise froide qui déroule sa feuille de route : c’est une aventure humaine. Alors oui, j’aime 0 A.D. Non seulement parce qu’il est un excellent RTS, mais parce qu’il est une preuve éclatante que le jeu vidéo peut être autre chose qu’un produit calibré pour vider des portefeuilles. 0 A.D. est libre, gratuit, ouvert. Il met en avant la passion, l’histoire, l’intelligence, et surtout l’humain. Et c’est exactement pour ça qu’il mérite qu’on y joue, qu’on le défende, et qu’on le fasse connaître. J'ai la gaule en écrivant ces mots.

I will try, but i didn't like the cheap cost of wall. for me in vanilla game it okay

with the old bonus civ macedonians, it was worse i guess

Hello everyone, I noticed that the capture system has recently been modified in the A27. (compared to Alpha 27). I would like to better understand the reason behind this change. What was the main motivation for adjusting the capture mechanics? (nerf the capture resistance) Was it mostly for balance purposes ? Are there any design notes or discussions I can read to follow the reasoning? I’m asking because the capture system is quite central to gameplay, and as a player I’d like to know the vision behind these changes. In the long run, what does the team (and community) want the capture system to be? A strong resistance mechanic (buildings being very hard to capture, taking time, mainly when base is empty capture is a nice decision)? A moderate option where some buildings are hard to capture and some moderate to capture? Thanks you

I don't think walls should cost less. It's going to get awful if that's the case. In the current situation, with a few hundred timbers, you can protect yourself from a disturbing attack quite early. Of course, you won't stop them if they're very motivated, but you'll buy enough time. Building + few palisade and you are ok Stone walls are quite solid and balanced in their construction time. What bothers me most is how catapults are so tanky against melee units. They should melt more if attacked in melee.

gauls were famous for iron and forge ,rome learnt from us are you talking about iberians lol?

+20food and -1 piercing armor and it ok , start lighty

You're free to move your hero, it's micro. However, there's no reason why a fleeing unit should run faster. and of course a heroe can kill woman and run!

only A9?

if i can change the setting of keybind for camera i can try send some scrennshot

Ok lets play corral with sword infantery for pick the goat for wood we can palisade the entire forest

then how you go attack his base for stop the fanatic spam? you send 30 spearmen CS acrros the map??

you picked mercenary XD plus how you do with a civ of archer? i'm agree fanatic OP on situation, not all time . If you build wall, have a civ with good civ, didnt start spam cav in 4vs4, etc, etc etc etc plus we don't know why gauls has a extra tech of food. You know this kind of bonus don't make civilizations unique, it just makes them unbalanced.

did you see the fanatic are not micro too? plus the distance unit are in circle

video, random stuff, no micro, just think what you want, this unit is a counter of cav, you can tell me i don"t have enough melee, it true, but anyway , fanatic run faster and they can pick the moment to fight (as cav) 1) One example with not bad placement for blue : 5 fanatic = 600 food 500 wood *** high speed, not able to pick ressource, big counter of cav 10 crossbow = 500 food 500 wood + 3 sperman = 150food 150 wood = 650 food 650 wood *** capacity to collect ressource / take more spot in house / feel good with 13 units to counter 5 units made for counter cav video 2) 5 fanatic = 600 food 500 wood 9 skirmish = 450 food 450 wood + 2 sperman = 100 food + 100 wood = 550 food 550 wood video 3) 20 archers + 3 spermen vs 8 fanatic = loose 1150 food 1150 wood vs 960 food 800 wood 8 champion infantery sword gauls win also (only 3 remains) 2.mp4 1.mp4 3.mp4

I like this too, but maybe we should up the cost ? or delete the armor piercing for be sensible to arrow, building and CS ? 1)If you build citizen soldiers to counter fanatic soldiers, you'll need more military pop than them to defend yourself. When you defend, you don't reap any rewards. You fall behind even if you don't lose units. You can't do the same thing to your enemy because you don't have any fast-running units (and there's no way you're building cavalry to play the same strategy). I don't see how you can have a good eco for beat the gaul using good the fanatic.

It means what? the fanatic don't cost enought ? how we counter this strategy? the main issue is the rush in eco no ? this unit shouldnt be so straong against no cav unit no? what people think?

Reduce their damage by 2. Increases food cost by 10 and piercing armor by 1.

we don't play the same game i guess. You have easy 2 or 3 metal mine in your territory. Champ cav are broken and they have absolute no weak point! they are tank, high hp, high attack. They have a big cost effiency combine to mobility. Speciality persians and sélucid some civ can litterality don't play against them. we need nerf champ cav by one solution (cost, tankiness, damage, building training change or another idea)

Hi, i don't like age of empire for this reason, too much counter of counter. 0ad fight are cool,you don't need too much knowledge. Yes, fanatics are strong. You have to know how to reduce their strength (remove their armor and shield?) or reduce their spam (increase the resource cost). We can even imagine the downgrade to a "mercenary" unit, I mean not champion but not citizen. So it would be a rank 2 unit that costs wood and food. They keep their strength against the cav and can harass a little but less. But above all, their control capacity with the high capture attack is removed. Banning units is not the solution so we have to find a solution, what do the people on the balance team think?

Hello, can you tell us what the mod does with an easy word for noob edit : the issue of same map all time?

He is a player with 800 rating, he probably dont care of rating no?

A27 has bug capture for my point of view

Welcome to a new community activity! The idea is simple: rate the reputation of the player who posted just before you, out of 100. This is all about perception. How well-known are they? Are they respected? Feared? Gameplay style? Loved? Or do they blend into the background like a stealthy NPC? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How to Play: Give a score out of 100 to the player post above you. Not more. Add a short/medium comment or reasoning (funny, honest, vague, savage — just keep it respectful). Then post your message so the next person can rate you. You don’t need to really know the person. First impressions matter too! Let it be known that all here are wise and of sound mind, so no drama shall arise within this forum. However, should any dispute occur, may it be settled in Mainland. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How much would you rate me?