Emacz

Finally figured it out, Im a little embarassed to say what it was. But its all good now! (Once I push it through to git, Im gonna clean up a few more things first so you will still see the error until its updated on the git site)

Yes and no, i havent found out which buildings they are yet, they are most likely. AI can sometimes help me track them down. Its on the list of things to do

I think i have notes some where... but again keep in mind its mostly me working on the tempaltes/files and sometimes i get sidetracked and then start working on something else and forgot. If there is something you were really passionate about fixing, Id rather you pestor me about it than assume Im gonna remember and go back and do it Ill take a look over notes in a little. Ill also say this, there are some things that I change that for some reason don't work/arent seen by other people. Not 100% sure whats going on with that sometimes. Its more technical unit stuff, like I can train ephors and diplomats, but most other people when they play can't for some reason.... even though we have same version of game. I dont think these are the types of things your talking about, but its pausble that I might see a description that someone else sees the old version. Im still relatively new. Yes I know! ANd when i asked if I should restrict them for now it said not yet. Again part of it is a balance thing. But they seem to be quite ineffective at moment anyway so ill need to fix that first.

Id have too double check, but I probably going to try and spend less time on forums since it doesn't seem to be very productive. I guess you can always send me a PM, i usually get those notices. The earliest conversation I have from you is the spread convo from may 22nd, then "Spartans" May 27th followed by "want to help" June 3rd Currently all civs should have. The main reason I brought it back was because then we can also make cav a little stronger and more useful, even for civs that don't have strong cavalry, they can protect a little with spikes. Since I'm having a hard time keeping track on forums and I guess understanding some of what you are saying, currently ChatGPT is my main source. It's said its plausible that all civs during the time would and could have built something similar to help deter cavalry.

Well again I have a hard time when I see people complaining about things or suggesting things and then they never happen. Naked Fanatics and CC still banned in most tgs for second alpha in a row. I'm either going to be active and incorporate as much as I can and encourage people to try it and see if that's what they like, or I'm going to focus my energy somewhere else. Ive been playing off and on for 10-15 years now..... and some of these complaints get old after a while

Makes sense, but one of the reason I created the project was to get more people involved so that there would be less complaining about things and then doing nothing about it. People can see some of the stuff in our mod, and vote some of it into main game if they like. I guess I'll just try and stay away from forum and trying to incorporate peoples suggestions. Maybe its time for another break from 0ad

In Classical Warfare AEA it provides a bonus: Compact formation of Melee Infantry creating a shield shell. + 4 Pierce and +1 Crush/Hack resistance but movement speed reduced by 60% speed

Ok, i think I understand what your saying. I had to reread it 3-4 times and couldnt figure it out at first. But yes the spartan tab of the website doesnt have all the changes. The manual is on the website and it has some of the changes from base game. I honstly haven't been keeping up with the website that much since no one seemed to be that interest. Again this isnt that helpful, so Ill just have to accept that we are wrong until someone else wants to point out where our mistakes are and how to fix them.

Ok, I downloaded the file from base game and removed the aura... however, You will still get the error for a while. Im gonna try and get a few more I push through any changes. Thanks for pointing this out! Oh wait, @Asher looks like you fixed this thanks, Although in the future I am now trying to use different branches (im kinda starting to understand them i think) so that if we make one simple change people don't need to redownload the full mod.

Yes, well again the manual isnt perfect either. Its ChatGPT trying to summarize everything. But Ill take a look at it and see if we can clean some of it up. what do you mean cut out in the link? Again if you looked at the manual, there are sections that very clearly compare CWA vs BASE. Look at the infantry base tab. You will notice all melee infantry are 0% different from Base. All ranged infantry are 100% of base... thus all "citizen" soliders have same HP. We used different "armor/resitance" packages to set them apart. Based Sword dps is 10.7 CWA is 9.5 the manual does that math so you dont have to tell you swordsman are about 10.9% less DPS than base game. In fact pretty much all "CS" is less DPS than base game, besides the pikeman which is actually up 17%, But are not as tanky as base game. You can check cavalry, champs etc and compare those stats to base game. I guess I will look at may 15th and see if i can find what you said. Again if you say one thing, and someone says something else and they actually play... Ill probably use there terminology for now. Spiked rollers should be implemented per your suggestion (I know longer have any conversations between us before may 15th. If it was in a previous CWA post, remember all my posts got wiped accidently cause they thought i was a spam bot. If you want to point me in the diretion of this may 15th stuff ill take a look. Thats the best I can do right now)

If a file is not in mod, but is in base game there shouldn't be an issue because the mod uses basegame files that wernet included. I will take a look into the camel. We did change some things with fauna in general, but it was more for the domesticated ones.

@Thalatta I thought Auxiliary was mainly a Roman term, form of "alliance". I guess you have still focused mostly on units stats, since there are simple corrections I think I already mentioned to you that are still not implemented, in the Spartans for example. Are you looking at manual or website, cause the manual very clearly has some of the differences, HPs of units, DPS, etc. Some of it can't be compared cause we have units that didn't exist in vanilla, and we do cavalry in 4 classes, so its not quite apples to apples. Yes mainly focused on unit stats, balance as of late. But as cant keep track of all sugestions. So if you want to remind us again, I can look into it.

Looks pretty OP! I will have to PM you to see how you are using AI. Wondering if I can share the updated manual with you when we make changes and if that can change stuff on the website. For example, currently Legacy of Marathon is not an Athens tech. But if we bring it back you would just have AI scan that manual and make changes?

Attached is an updated manual. It has some base vs CWA comparrions. Id like to think we are near completion, or at least for this alpha The only thing Im really unsure of is some of the balances between units. We really need a lot more play testing to conclude that. There also may still be a few bugs/errors that I havent caught yet. So if you are interested in testing it out either SP or MP that would be much appreciated. Please share any feedback here. Even if it's "this is the worst mod ever" Although i would hope if that was your opinion you would at least say what makes it so bad so we can consider changing it CWA_manual_v1.8.0.xlsm

I wasn’t speaking in terms of historical accuracy. But I realized the file I was using was probably from A26 or A27. Basically the modifications didn’t match the tooltip. Similar to Serapis cult. Tool tip says you can unlock in town phase, but modification is for city phase.

But looks like Serapis Cult is still not correct? "requirements": { "all": [ {"tech": "phase_city"}, {"civ": "ptol"} ] }, "requirementsTooltip": "Unlocked in Town Phase.",

Has anyone noticed that the tooltip for the juggernauts tech is not accurate Disregard, looks like its an older version

Not 100% true. We add pop bonus to ssystion before it was added into base game. We also used ram garrison to add speed/acceleration to rams before it made it into base game.

You should check out Classical Warfare I think it might be the main reason people are "turned off" by it, reluctent to try it. Its not as simple, almost identical civs, play styles as you find in the current base game. It still has a lot of polishing to do of course.

OP even more lag, unbalanced team, and rage quits But awesomely done

Again i love some of these ideas if you can actually tweak the actors that would be awesome! I can create some of the icons with AI too. Here are a few examples of Icons i would like to turn into actors.

Yes and no We created more templates, so it's: template_structure_civic_civil_tribal

so britons build hill forts to 'expand'. We give them (and other trible civs) only one "main civic center" then they expand through "colony" type buildings, brits, gauls, germs can all start doing it p1 with their hill forts, oppidums and encampments. Iber is a tribal civ but cant expand utnil p2 like other civs with its "castro". Castros are a liuttle closer to colonies, maybe a little stronger, id have to check all the stats. Where as the other 3 are weaker than a normal colony and defintely weaker than a cc.

Icons aren't the issue. Im working with ChatGPT to help with things. But we had a problem when we tried to recreate actors to look like some of our ICons. IE the brit hill fort and great hill fort pictured here: I actually don't mind the "cc" actor too much, but it would be nice to get it to include some palisades and look likes its more up on a "hill" if thats possible.

already have a topic