hyperion

@bb_ has a valid point, and if we talk about modders expectation, undefined == infinity sounds simply backwards. "No resistance (defined) is zero resistance" is true for all natural langues I know. Javascript having them both falsey is telling as well. Adding INF for all to the default/base template is certainly more natural. So we break healing rate and repair rate to prettify some numbers? I suspect people like @chrstgtr are only bothered with those numbers because they have to look at them regularly for checking the opponents upgrades. If they weren't reflected or only accessible via other means, like entity model changes or let's say changes to the spy interface they couldn't be bothered. If you want to go ahead with this please also state how you intend to handle healing/repair. Well, I admit that some people want to know how it exactly works and there is no reason to prevent them to figure it out. I also checked the code when I started playing. The point is beside satisfying our curiosity it's mostly useless information. If you know the formula you need maybe 10 games and without maybe 50 games to figure out the impact. After that the value of this info is pretty much exhausted. Anyway, the table posted by Nescio in the linked thread is much better for this purpose than the gui could ever be. So if you don't want people to have to check the code, a wiki page seems the right choice.

For a new player it doesn't matter at all what those value mean. Knowing bigger is better is all that counts. Looking at the linked thread, not even top player need to understand it to reach the top. I could be wrong but I feel dropping the percentage figures completely might be for the best. You don't need need a master degree in math to enjoy the game or to be good at it. Those who care can check the code, the wiki or the forums.

Some thoughts for this type of mod: exactly one tree variant per amount of wood exactly one berry variant per amount of food all hunt the same colorization remove tall grass like the one in Nubia

Hard to attach the sound to a source not in world. Pseudo source center screen? Not quite right either.

Without communicating it to peers you'd get OOS. Surly possible but not as easy as exposing it in the UI. So I'd have a hotkey "attack hero"?

This goes to show the usefulness of P2 siege unit, you don't seem to even beware they already exist for a long time in the form of club man.

While there is capturing is probably hard to make this unit really useful and would be mostly obsolete if there was the arsonist attack. Still the only real reason which might really block this is the lack of quality models. So finding an capable artist is the hard part here. If you want to make them anything but stronger club man with higher cost and change half the game alongside their introduction the lower the chance it will be accepted.

If a user has to change the default filter to something like old maps or testing maps to see the lower quality ones, I see no risk of the above being the case. There might indeed be little value of keeping them but the argument made against removal on the patch is reasonable enough for me given there is no harm. There was something off with the textures, glad if it was fixed. Still might be worth bringing up the discussion of which should be the default be. Always felt Acropolis Bay might not be the ideal choice for an "ad".

Only the default map really matters, haven't seen playing anyone anything beside acropolis bay first, which also means basically any review will be done using that map.

Ramming and other fancy stuff is not (yet) available so it's out of scope. I haven't even seen a description of that feature which allows an implementation, given someone actually wants to work on one. About ship movement, turn-rates and the recent addition of acceleration by @bb_ , even if for a bogus reason (dancing) are important cornerstones to improve on movement. I wouldn't call it fully mature yet but it's already worth playing with. I believe to remember @alre and maybe @maroder also did some work in that direction.

No, statistics on which civ players choose, whether win loss/ratio fits statistical expectations, length of games and other collectable data, then trying to make sense of all the data. Complement it with questionnaires as to what people like about civs and what not. The goal should be to have all civs be somewhat attractive for whatever reasons, if it's just the sound track that makes a civ popular that is fine as well If those "we need ultimate balance for competitive games" people have a couple interesting civs which work for them to choose from that is good enough, they just have to have the possibility of a filter which is currently lacking. Contribute redirects to https://code.wildfiregames.com/source/design/ which returns an error --- @maroder A design document should be about principles, not stats or similar details. What it could describe without thinking much about it: How to update the design document (process) If I want to add a civ, what do I have to fulfill If I want to add a map, what do I have to make sure If I want to add a model, what requirements are there If I want to write a new ui, what must I make sure of How to bring historical facts to the users attention How should city building aspect work How should fights work on a meta level What is territory meant to achieve many more For instance the removal of kennels without the backing of a design document shouldn't have happened IMHO.

There are multiple aspects that need to be addressed wrt ships. First is certainly size. While they are somewhat reasonable size compared to units they may be 3 times as big as the dock which produced them. There must be some compressed space in there So if we have established that down-scaling ships is an option, what do we hope to gain from it. Certainly room for actual navigation and fighting needs to be mentioned. My gut feeling tells me biremes are still to large. Next comes what type of ship are need to make naval maps/warfare interesting. A non exhaustive list of options follows. fishing ships trade ships transport ships war ships (probably multiple types, like frigates, fortress type ships etc) siege ships special purpose ships like the fire ships They are fully abstract and one should be careful to not associate them with a certain model. Let's use wow's new favorite term mixins, they are just that. If you want good game-play primarily think about game-play and then bend reality as little as possible to follow what you envisioned as mechanics. But sacrifices need be made surely. Once we have an outline of the types and their roles and what combinations are usable by civs, we assign civs and models to them. If there are leftover models using them to visualize tech upgrades is certainly an option even though this is not common practice in 0ad so far. Might be worth investing into though, was asked more than once why phasing up doesn't visually upgrade structures, seems counter intuitive for many. But I digress, knife model number 15 for females which no one ever sees is apparently more interesting.

Without moderation it won't work as a recent example showed because after all everything is about balancing, no need for any other forum. Looking at @Gurken Khan Honestly I don't mind a closed group as long as no one pretends it was discussed openly, either it's fully open or it's not. And yes, in the latter case I can't be bothered to participate. Balancing is also given far to much weight, broken packing of catas is far worse than the discussed balancing issues when it comes to retaining users. Any new user with a 4k screen will hardly stick around long enough to find the gui.scale property. The list of potential show stoppers is long. New features are a 100 times worse than fixing existing ones. About multiplayer, the lobby climate I consider most important and that seems to be a major issue currently. As for balancing, without proper statistics or at least some quality questionnaires, it's a headless chicken. Add to that that balancing, realism and game play may have contradictory goals and there is no clear statement / moderation line what has precedence. Also balance isn't any worse than other similar titles. We just have to accept that fixing only game breaking issues (for instance deathballs like roman scorpios in the past) is plenty good enough. Honestly, I'd just replace the whole balancing effort with a balancing tech, as balancing is an e-sport here, we need more than 1 vector so those folks don't have it to easy. Let's say one roughly corresponding to the 3 base strategies, boom, turtle, rush. If for example a civ has a to strong an eco, just reduce the eco factor and so forth. Then anything not about tweaking those 3 factors is by definition not balancing at all.

You can give units whatever damage profile you like, arson is just visuals. It's certainly not conceivable that units would carry torches and lighters around, so I see this as a request to replace the somewhat lame capture delete with something more pleasing and setting fires and seeing buildings burn sounds at least great on paper. Blowing buildings into the sky with ultra sonic cannons might also be fun, just that this is hard to argue for in this setting. Edit: fix hard to understand typo.

Slow as in low fps in big brawls.

Because the game isn't slow enough already

Looking at the feature list there is quite a bit that sounds nice enough to actually give it a try. Well done! Some nitpicks which might make it easier to users: Publish the mod as a git repo, makes it easier to track changes and so easier to review in the long run if you want it on mod.io Use version like 0.25.0 so users know which version of 0ad the mod is meant for, even a few years down the road You could change the zip extension to pyromod so it gets associated with 0ad on many systems and hopefully a double click is all that is needed to install

The feature is ok, even if not the most breathtaking one, it doesn't hurt, the only issue is discoverability. The solution is not to add more phases, change how spear cav works or change map generation, just a simple patch updating the help string will do.

Might be player name, but then it's always your own name you see here, so not of much value either. A font bitmap could be added for now and anyway font rendering is on it's way, not unlikely to make it into a27. Getting the rotation to work is the same as being able to animate, so might be worth doing it in a prototype. There is already an api for driving the camera as suggested by @wowgetoffyourcellphone IIRC. The snap is indeed not well defined with winning action, could fall back to original location of last/former CC instead. ------ What about player resignations in team games?

Probably should change defense instead of health to avoid odd side effects. Otherwise why not, certainly no worse than current setup

There is a bug in A25 which got fixed for the rerelease A25b, might be the reason here.

Chess has plenty statistics that show white wins more often than black and we can take the unbalance as given. This is different from 0ad where there is speculation about, outcry, and lots of random proposals

Depends on the ISP, stun will for ever be works for some and not for others. Proper port forwarding > upnp (miniupnp) > stun.

Outpost rushes are of the past

Unlike a community plugin that appears to haven't been updated in like 5 years IRC is reliable, doesn't eat resources and does only what it's supposed to do, so just like email it will likely outlive all cool and trendy alternatives. Add that it's open, tooling is plenty and writing bots is trivial.