Nullus

Disclaimer: I'm not a competitive, or even particularly good player. I mostly just play 0ad casually, and I don't have too much experience. That being said, however, I completely agree with this. I think that more gameplay styles would make the game much more enjoyable. Right now, basically all strategies can be done with all civs, with only varying degrees of effectiveness. What I would do to differentiate styles while still maintaining some balance is this: I would give each civ a unique style or bonus, but each style or bonus is countered by another civ's bonus. That way, each civ is unique, while not being overpowered. For a very basic example: Britons raid, giving them strong early attack and the ability to build bases beyond their borders, but are weak in the late game. Iberians turtle, with strong walls and defensive structures, but weak offense. Macedonians have good seige, giving them the ability to destroy defensive structures easily, but a weak early game. The Iberians' defense counters the Britons' raiding, the Macedonians' seige counters the Iberian defense, and the Britons early expansion counters the Macedonian's late game. This is just a basic example, a more elaborate design would be necessary for the game, but I hope it gives a good idea.

It could be that P2 champions start out weaker, but can promote with experience to their P3 values.

Thanks for the information! Is there a plan to switch to a beta in the foreseeable future, or are there still too many major changes for that?

@Freagarach @wraitii @Angen @Stan` I'd love to hear your opinions. If there are any other developers I missed, I'd be interested to hear your views.

I'm wondering what the remaining steps are before the game enters beta. I saw the Gameplay Feature Status wiki, but the last time that anything was updated on that was at least 4 years ago. Is that page still up to date? I'm also wondering what goals the programmers have? The artists? Map designers? What are your top priorities for the game? If there are any game developers that I missed, I'd be interested to know what your priorities are.

You might not have any victory conditions set in the game settings. If there is no victory option set, you can never win the game.

Would it be possible for a status effect to replace the animation for a unit? For example, could it replace the death animation? If so, how would I do that?

Would it be possible for a status effect to apply an animation?

Thanks, I've looked at the Carthaginian buildings but I'm not quite sure how the feature works. Is it possible for only one type of attack, such as fire, to trigger the animation? Also, can this apply to units as well as buildings?

Is there a way for an attack to trigger a special animation on the attacked unit? For example, could fire archers trigger a burning animation on buildings which they hit?

What I had in mind was a system where players could combine groups of soldiers into battalions. Players could give orders to a battalion as a whole, and all of the soldiers in the battalion would obey them, for example move and attack orders. Players could group soldiers into battalions and break battalions apart into individual soldiers. That way, citizen-soldiers would still be useful for more micromanagement for economy during peacetime, but they could also be easier to manage in battles. The description of D2175 is pretty close to what I had in mind. If people come up with more advanced ideas for battalions, they could be implemented in the future, but I think that this would be a good base for them.

It would be nice to have battalions implemented at some point. If I understand correctly, this would be fairly easy to add, at least in a basic form.

I like to spend time making my cities look nice, so I probably play at a slower pace than most players.

It happens with all the houses that I've seen, not just Carthage.

I've tested the SVN version slightly, and I really like it so far. There are only a few minor bugs that I've noticed. I've noticed that when units are building a structure with more than one visual variant, like a house, it will show one variant during construction, but once the structure is finished, the variant will sometimes change. Another minor issue is that the Kushite warships have outdated icons:

Hi, I was wondering if there was any mechanic for units or buildings having areas on themselves where they could walk. I don't mean like turrets, where the units are stationary in relation to the main unit, I mean more like a small section of terrain as part of a unit. If something like this exists, I thought it could be interesting to try out using something like that for wall, siege towers, and ships. That could allow, for example, a siege tower to carry a group of units up to a wall and unload them onto the wall's walkable area to try to capture the wall. That would make siege more interesting, and more realistic. If this feature is already in the game, could someone please show me how to use it? If it is not in the game, but could be added in a mod, how would I get started adding that feature? If adding it would require changes to the game engine, could one of the developers please add it? I realise that it would probably be difficult, but I think it could be a major improvement.

Thanks, I wasn't sure if this was intentional.

I've been using the SVN version. I noticed today that the keyboard seems to use Dvorak for the chat, but the hotkeys use Querty.

Hi, I use the Dvorak keyboard layout on my computer. However, I've noticed that the game seems to change the keyboard layout to QWERTY. I know that on A23 it uses Dvorak. Is this intended?

Thanks, I'll check that out.

Hi, I've been working on some modifications to 0ad that would allow a default building orientation to be set on maps. The changes define a new player attribute, DefaultRotation, in the JSON describing a map's players. However, when I define this attribute in a map's data, that attribute is not passed as part of the "settings" object to LoadPlayerSettings() in /simulation/helpers/Player.js. So the program ends up falling back on the default values. I assume that I would need to modify the code that generates the "settings" object. I don't know where this code is located, though. Are those the changes that I would need to make? And if so, where is this code?

I've updated the map with more elevation variation and a new road from the Roman city to their Celtic allies.

I've updated the map to use more varied textures for the grass. Does this look better?

Hi, thanks for the advice. For adding texture variation, would using more varieties of grass be a good way to do that? Also, is there a way to set the default rotation for buildings created by a player? I've noticed that buildings constructed by the AI are misaligned with the buildings placed in the scenario.

Hi, I just started working on maps recently, this is the first one I've completed. I would welcome any advice or tips for improvement. I packaged it as a mod to make it easier to distribute. It's a map of a British forest under invasion by Romans. Roman invaders have built a colony along the banks of a river. Two Celtic tribes live in villages in the forest. One tribe is allied with the Romans, the other is unallied. The player is a third Celtic tribe which is encamped in a hillfort. The Romans are heavily fortified against attack, but will be forced to expand into vulnerable territory to gain resources. Across the river there is a crannoc controlled by Gaia and defended by Gaia warriors. If the player can capture this, it will allow him to easily launch attacks against the port of the Roman city. map_Conquest_of_Britain.zip