myou5e

Well, as someone here has said, I think Grapejuice, I think it's really good to have what the unit looks like intuitively be good at what you think by looking at it. This isn't the same thing, but I think it's a related point and that's my goal. I guess it also allows more flexibility when new units or matchups come into play that you don't expect, you don't need to add more exceptions, because the stats already balance.

I've never liked how certain units get a "bonus attack" vs other types. They need to have their damage types, range, HP, armor types etc and that is sufficient to make a counter. It makes the gameplay far more intuitive.

Composition over Inheritence. IMO it's a better way to construct a set of objects that share properties. Inheritance specifies relationships between classes as a tree structure, but Composition more like a mesh. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_over_inheritance

I sort of like this idea. Each decision maker gets an alpha, or two.

Ok I'm going to read this

What do you mean about micromanagement ? What does the current(very old) DD say about this?

The Purpose of the DD(from what I know) is to guide and limit designers, developers, programmers, artists. Limiting can have very negative connotations, obviously, but the idea is that 0AD is not a First Person Shooter set in a futuristic space age. This would be one limitation put in place by the DD. A more specific limitation is on the artist to strive to make somewhat historically accurate depictions, but also to exaggerate them a little to make them clear.

This is helpful.

I've been talking to Stan about this. I really want to be involved here as it is something I think that I can do well. I actually do have ideas about features I want to add to vanilla, but they are not widely accepted now, so I don't think it's appropriate to add them to the DD. I do hope Stan likes and accepts my contributions. But obviously that's an ongoing process, will require revisions, will require updates, and he has no obligation to do so :-p. Here are two things that I think should be included For additional content civ and unit content. Summarizing how to contribute in a way that maintains balance. For example, someone wants to get Zapotecs added to the game. Well, what thought process do you go through to balance them? Sufficient art, unit, templates, buildings to make them interesting and comparable to other civs. Some comments on art style. Sufficient strengths and weaknesses that differentiate them enough to make them a worthy in game choice. One contribution I would like to make is a combat and Civ balance calculator that can calculate the winner of unit matchups. As well as calculate Civ strength and weaknesses based on template files and user input(an html form inside the DD which can tell you a Civ or unit strength based on the modifications you tell it). For the Development team. I think this part is the less clear. Where does the dev team want to go with the game in the future? Is avoiding "Fastest click wins" still a design goal? This requires thinking about how to actuate this. It may need new combat mechanics to give battles more strategic emphasis over numbers. So general ideas like this can actually drive the game forward into deciding which new mechanics should be used. Is removing repetition still a design goal? Building houses and farms and even walls takes time to click. There could be more mechanics to make an AI handle these things at different stages. You could make the AI automate the build order somehow, while allowing the human player high level control. Audience. Who are we trying to market to primarily? Because this majorly affects the vanilla settings, I think. The above two are intentioned as examples of how a design goal can affect the development and choice of additions to the game. Discussions need to take place between the DD Writers with Stan and others about this. @Stan`

We were discussing this in IRC. I want to have them back for Documentation purposes. They can be excluded for the translators if need be another way. But I think they are good for game culture and mood etc.

I want to agree with you but I think we deleted those :-p

I admire your optimism. But how do you stop things from going wrong? You have 91 matchups I think with 13 civs? I think it's easier if you consider Meta to be part of game. I think Starcraft is the most balanced Asymmetric game, but they only have 3 civs with 6 possible 1v1 matchups. Any of those is very well balanced. But how can you test for 91? Only if some civs are "situational", which is the case in games like "DOTA" where you know there are good and bad picks. My point is you have to sacrifice something, I think it's usability given certain matchups and certain maps, biomes etc.

毛利人 Is Maori. I hope we can have some Oceanic Friends in the game some day :-). I think the Mauryans are called 孔雀王朝 (Peacock Dynasty) in Mandarin right?

I love Asymmetry but WITH 13 CIVS + BALANCE ? ? ? ? :-p

Yes I would agree. I think certain units would have very high morale and they would fight more ferociously when wounded, rather than betray you. This could apply to Norse maybe, and a lot of elite units and heroes.

I would LOVE this, especially for Mercenaries in my opinion. Mercenaries aren't going to die for you haha. This has always been their problem, so paying them off or cornering them could be an important strategy.

Not to be racist or anything, I'm sure their parents loved their children very much and had great motivation when they called their child "Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus Cunctator", but I'm just saying I do wish their parents had considered a little more the challenges that such decisions would have upon User Interfaces in the deep future which being designed for any reasonable language would not occlude text but unfortunately does for such ridiculously ostentatious names. What should be done about the Roman Question?

Just wanted to say good job Grapejuice :-p. I like all these added mechanics especially: Ammo Heals Projectile cosmetics Wounded Secondary attacks Charge The only major problem I have with it is that it lags on my PC :-p. I guess it's all those calculations in the background.

Just want to say this looks fantastic :-). Would love to get this working on A26 I guess a few changes would need to be made now :-p

Would it take extra loading time to change only the template files, but not load new textures? I'm wondering if it is helpful for me to not load unnecessary template overwrites in my mod.

Hey is it normal that with DE, the Objects take a long time to load into Atlas ?

Hey, I noticed that when arrows impact a unit, they kind of look like they are disappearing into the air. Is this because the units are too wide? Could their actor width be decreased and possibly ranged unit spread decrease to compensate? It would look more realistic.

Then I would need to compile by myself :-p which is hard to do on my PC. It could be the issue. I may try it later.

Not sure where to put this, mods can move to different section if appropriate. I just want to share the different frame rate I am experiencing on A23 vs A24. This is partly because @Stan` asked me about why this might be happening on my machine. I don't know, I am just here reporting that it does. On Acropolis Bay, I get 16ms / frame on A23, but 50ms / frame on A24. One idea I can think of is that perhaps the Snap version(which I use for A24) is slow because of the way it manages it's data.