roscany

I've seen it once. Player A build a forward CC and Fort close enough to join root with their Ally. Player B on the opposite team captured the CC of Player A, but left the fort standing. Player A's fort was close enough to their Ally to keep the its loyalty and started to attack the loyalty of the damaged CC until Player B garrisoned the CC. Yeah, in all the games I spec'd I've maybe noticed this once. Big enough territory influence to take over nearby structures, but not enough to keep its own................

I don't really understand the rationale behind this. If a sole fort has no root attached to it, why should it affect the loyalty of a building that does have a root?

I see in the description of the Maurya hero building, the Harmya, it says "Territory Root." I agree with @chrstgtr, this seems like a random addition to the civ. I'm curious why it only applies to Maurya and Persia. If there is a historical justification, I'd understand I guess. I did a quick test and it looks like the Persian hero building, the Apadana, also has this feature of maintaining root without a CC, but there is no mention of it in the building's description. Maybe one of the developers/ BAs can add it in if this feature is to continue? Thanks for answering my question.

Hey everyone, Hoping you can clear up something that I'm unclear about. In a 4v4 TG the other day, my CC was destroyed and I lost my territory (shoutout @SaidRdz). I was surprised I lost my territory, as I thought that having a fort and a hero building nearby my CC would allow me to maintain my general territory root without losing all of my buildings. I know I've seen people (shoutout @SaidRdz) maintain their territory root with only a hero building , and I'm pretty sure I've seen forts keep territory and even capture a nearby weakened CC in TGs. A player in the game mentioned that only some hero buildings (maur, maybe others?) have a feature which allows them to keep their root. This seems like a random addition for just one civ, and I do get that we want to differentiate civs, but seems a little silly. I've attached a screenshot of my base for reference. For what its worth, I thought my buildings were close enough to my pocket Ally to keep my root regardless, but I acknowledge it may have been just out of range. TL;DR... does a fort have any influence on territory root? Is Maur the only civ that's hero building has territory root, and is this cool or lame? Thanks!

Most TGs and 1v1s take place on Temperate or Alpine biomes where wood is abundant. Starting resources can create a lot in inequity with other biomes with less starting wood (abundant stone available for slingers, Maurya with Worker Els deposit, etc.). The biome with a lot of hunt and sporadic wood can heavily favour maur for instance. A biome like temperate or alpine usually gives for a relatively equal chance of success for all civs.

What are the other functions of the autociv mod? I thought it only had to do with selecting civs before the game starts lol...

I would refrain from calling it a "cheat;" that seems rather antagonistic. Its a skill in some sense - some players are better at strategically using it than others - but it does feel like its stripping an essential part of the core 0 AD experience, which is why I can't get behind it. I do think it creates an unfair advantage, but I wouldn't go as far as calling it a cheat. Admittedly, I've never tried it. I think the stock 0 AD interface is pretty good, so I don't feel the need.

roscany

How can you identify which mods a player is using in a TG? Isn't this info only available for the host of the TG? Edit: I also think the level of automation that is starting to pop up is starting to kill the game. With this auto-train feature (not auto-queue) players can spend all their time focussing on microing their units without having to check up on their eco and unit production. I'm only really able to tell who is using this feature when I'm spectating a game. It's frustrating realizing afterwards that a player I lost to in a 1v1 was using this mod when I wasn't, even though it was an unrated game.

Why is Norse editing the comments of others? This seems like a misuse of mod powers.

loooooooooooooool i'm flattered