maroder

I like the idea to convert mercenaries for money. see here for a concept mod: I also like capturing of eles. imo they could have a much more interesting dynamic. Disagree. You can change the usefulness of mercs to accommodate such a mechanic (and not to forget that there already have been huge changes to the mercs for a25). For the eles: yeah that is a concern, but there are surely ways to make it not too op.

@feneur @Grapjas @m7600 I have the icons from my post as png with 96*96 and transparency around the circle, so if you want to use them or continue to work on them just say so.

I never looked into it, but from guessing I would say that the speed in the animation file is the speed at which the animation is played at and the speed in the unit template file is the speed at which the unit actually moves in the simulation. So you have to change both, until they speed of the animation looks good in combination to the speed at which the units moves. So I would guess that the speed in the animation file is a unit of time (probably seconds) which controls the length and therefore the speed of the animation and the speed in the unit template is an actual speed (meter per second or something like that).

We could take the civ icons, because they look nice. Problem is that would maybe imply some kind of rating of the civs. But we could also use other technology or building icons. I made some based on your suggestions and what was available: forum_ranks.zip

@Mr.lie What was the ai difficulty?

Well we do have the in game icons, which would fit the "theme"

It is indeed not directly related to the art, therefore the ticket on track. The walk speed is specified in: 0ad/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/gaia/fauna_camel.xml there you find: ```` <UnitMotion> <WalkSpeed op="mul">0.45</WalkSpeed> </UnitMotion> ````

yes definitively, as long as you only want to change javascript / strings / unit stats ect. In these cases you can make patches based on the svn autobuild and there is no need to build yourself. When you want to change c++ code or anything that is related to how the engine works, then you probably want to rebuild, to actually test what you are doing.

Hard to say tbh. Am I correct to assume that shadows outside of the camera get not rendered anyway and don't influence the performance? Generally I like to zoom out from time to time to have a better overview and then 500 or 600 is definitively better. Or the best solution: LOD for the shadows. High res the closer you zoom in and lowest quality when you zoom out

What specifically is the problem with them? I never played AOE3 so not sure what you mean

I appreciate the enthusiasm, but there are so many mods and concepts out there, that I think a design document would be a better start than just throwing all together.

It should also be able to do that, so that's no mistake

Look at @Grapjas mod:

Do we have any resident Wikipedia people who could update our page?

Strong support for this idea. There are the players who like the a23 gameplay and want it refined through small incremental balancing changes and there are other players who want to have new mechanics and a different more experimental gameplay style. And it is obviously not possible to do that at the same time. Link to relevant discussion in other thread: So we could have a game setup option called "classic" or "Empires Ascendant" and one that is called "experimental" or "Empires Extended". With this we don't split the community, because you could decide each match, what gameplay you want. Also: one "official" experimental mod is much easier to maintain as multiple small mods that are maintained by different persons and not integrated from the beginning.

@chrstgtr I think I get what you're saying and the concerns about taking away the difficulty. But do all multiplayer agree with you? As @Player of 0AD mentioned, @nani's widely used autociv mod also implements autotrain and made it efficient. AFAIK those two are regular multiplayer (correct me if i'm wrong) and autociv is used by many people, so some of which surly also used autotrain in MP games. So my question is (because I don't play MP that often): Did that had a negative impact on the skill level that is/ was required? Where there any negative consequences for the competitiveness? Because all I heard about autociv until now, is that it is one of the favorite mods that really enhance the game experience.

I like the idea. Long term we need to see if the mining rates then need to be adjusted, when you have no longer a problem to find resources.

Even if you play causally against other people or the AI, you still want to win. And the way to do that is the produce as many units as you can (Even with high starting resources). So causal player can still get annoyed by the repetitive action of microing the unit training. Therefore, autotraining will help those players and as it is implemented atm, it still benefits manually queuing for the micro enthusiasts. And about the diminishing of the competitive gameplay: So you are saying when autotraining is enabled in a match you would play on the same level as someone who plays the game for the first time? I doubt it. Experience, strategic thinking and the ability to execute a plan still matter. So why would this diminish the competitiveness when such a feature is there and it isn't even as good as you microing?

that would also solve lot of performance problems

Totally agree, I would like to see a match based on pure skill! Micro every unit /ban pathfinding

You misunderstood what I meant (Maybe I didn't explain well enough what I meant). I didn't say I want it equalized, I said clicking the same button over and over again is repetitive and kind of boring, therefore an automation here is different than an automation of the build order. I'm not against to have an advantage doing in manually (batch training), I am against that this alone should decide if someone wins.

You're correct with your statement but your conclusion does not fit to the autoquqeue for me. When you automate the build order you loose strategic decisions, which takes away the fun. When you automate training you loose the need to reclick the same button over and over again every few seconds, which increases the fun for me. Citing from here: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/0AD_The_Vision#Snares The ability to be able to click a button fast should not decide who wins, the strategic thought process behind it should.

Those pages are very helpful: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/SubmittingPatches https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/BuildInstructions https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/BuildInstructionsGettingTheCode So basically: Download TortoiseSVN. Clone the official repo. Change some code. Test if it works. Save the change as a patch. Upload it manually to phabricator. You can also use command line to do that but it's more complicated to setup. And I'm sure @Stan` or other people at the irc channel will help you get ready to make a patch (although a good time may be after the feature freeze and important bug fixing that is done after that )

Also thinking about including only one tip for the formations.

Thinking about either adding tips for all the biomes or removing the savanna one. Opinions?