LetswaveaBook

My guess would be that Yekaterinas comment was ironical. Seems like you fell for it ;P

Here is the story of us: https://play0ad.com/about/the-story-of-0-a-d/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nN6VR92V70M Beware of trolls(very strong AoM unit) though.

The problem with that as far as I can judge is that it measures how much you play as much as what your win ratio is.

If this is the problem, we could easily counteract it by making that CC can store wood/minerals but no food(or lets just make it wheat whereas meat and berries can). If you can store wood in the CC, you can build a farmstead and farms and you will still be able to get going. Also I highly doubt if towns will start to look as idyllic in the right picture. The only way to really know is to let people play on such a mod as I can not judge how other people would make a layout for their base. However I do suspect there will be a lot more housewalling to keep your eco safe and map generation would become more decisive. I think it will hurt gameplay more than it helps.

Historically, I guess if there was fertile farmland somewhere, then some people would settle it. build a little cosy house in the neighbourhood. In the game, players build farms at positions that are well defendable(in current meta around CCs). We build farms inside a fortified area. The defensive capabilities help our farmers, wheres houses and other buildings don´t need to be placed in areas that are well defendable. When using this type of logic, it is understandable that it will never look like in real live. Building farms in defensive positions seems logical whereas CCs don´t give reason to build other buildings(to form a city layout) close to them. This is aided by the fact that some players build their buildings(esp. barracks) at the edge of their territory to get some extra territory.

Just another Sunday in open source land!

If I had to do a suggestion for an army camp, I would suggest a building that gives a +15% attack aura in a 120 meter range(enough to build it near fortifications and have an advantage on taking them). However an army camp would slowly dismantle and lose the aura unless you sacrifice large supplies, making it a building with temporary use only. Also army camps should be destroyed upon capture, which should provide considerable loot and be fairly easy if there is no supporting army. If you delete your own army camp, you could get some resources back.

I think the dev team has things quite right. I think only small stat changes are in place. From what I´ve seen in AoE2, small changes can have a drastic impact on the preferred strategy in RTS games. I am more the type of boom player and I think booming is advantageous against turtling opponents. However I can understand that the meta currently might not be the best it could be. I think it would be solved with a few small stat changes. If melee cavalry and infantry swordsmen(for infantry swordsmen maybe also +10% speed) would get +1 pierce armor and towers would take +50% longer to build and upgrade, I think the meta would be fine.

Carthaginians do as far as I know not have a lot to distinguish themselves competitively in 1v1. Style-wise, they only distinguish themselves with nonviable mercenaries. They do have their apartments which seem cool, but are locked to p2. When you reach p2, the minor advantage that apartments seem to offer doesn´t make a lot of impact(especially not with A24 p2 timings). Therefore I would like to do this suggestion: Instead of apartments being locked to p2, I would like to see apartments being unlocked as soon as you have 5 p1 buildings. So for most builds that would mean 3 houses, a farmstead and a storehouse. It would give a small eco advantage, but only after you reached 50 pop. So it is a nice bonus but nothing over the top. The Carthaginian player still needs probably the 3 houses at the start, which means players still get a nice mix of houses and apartments(because mono-culture is boring). In later stages, Carthaginian players will still build houses if they lack stone or need pop quickly when the are housed. Also apartments in this suggestion no longer count as a requirement for p3. I would like to hear your ideas on this.

If I had to do a suggestion, I would go for a faction that represents the Greeks in southern Italy. Syracuse was one of the largest cities in the Mediterranean and was active against both Athene(defeating Athenes fleet and contributing to the end of Athenian hegemony) and they also fought both Carthage and Rome. They are another Greek faction(limits diversity), but that makes fit in with the others. I also recently found a vid about the Kushan empire which might also be interesting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gc4p_KQGf4

My view is that if your units get slaughtered, the player should get a visual notification. No spooky actions at a distance!

I have to remark that 2 barracks having each 1 unit in the que will cost you 800 resources(100 per unit and 300 per barrack). One barrack with 10 units in the que produces units slower and costs 1300 resources. If you have 2 barracks with 1 unit in the que you can also produce faster. I think going for large ques is not the best way to use your resources.

What I also like about the idea is that we can play around with the times which it takes to turn enemy in neutral and neutral in owned. That would give more options for balancing it out.

I voted that it is not abuse. I think that we have to see it in perspective. It is so hard to reclaim your own territory if someone sneakily captures your own CC, temple or tower. So I think it is only fair if you are able to delete it.

Regarding competitive play I can say that you need every click to be as useful as possible and you should minimize idle time. Setting up ambushes and waiting form an enemy to show up does not seem worthwhile to me at higher levels.

As long as fortresses, siege and champion elephants are still limited to city phase, there will be plenty reason to go to the city phase. Also city phase gives extra eco upgrades. And once you get to the city phase, pop efficiency start to matter and that makes eco upgrades more viable. If we add the eco techs (plow and stronger axe) to the cost, I would get at a total cost of (1100F, 1800W,1200M). In return the player gets an army that matches the strenght of an unupgraded army with +15% more numbers. Also you workers then collect about 15% more. We now have an investment of 4100 res(=36units) for an advantage that 15% more units can give at the same time. Math tells us that we hence do have a break even point of pop 240 before it gets worth it. If we have about 25. Hence we really need to get p2 for the other benefits. About unit choice, I would like to say that archer civs tend to produce archers in any age. So many civs get those extra options, but player seem to ignore them and I think they have a fair point. The territory is nice as are the stronger towers, temples and CC/militairy colonies. I would be wondering how to quantify those two advantages. I just think p2 and its upgrades do not offer enough to be worth it before pop 120

I fully agree with ValihrAnt that phase 2 should be more valuable. However, I do not think that just the blacksmith upgrades are the solution to this. To support this, I would like to say that if you do the first defence and offence blacksmith upgrade, your troops are probably only equivalent to an unupgraded army that is 15% larger in size. To get this advantage, you invest in an age up(500F,500W), building a blacksmith(200w), the upgrades(600F,400M+400W,400M) totalling at (1100F, 1100W,800M). What I am neglecting is that p2 also gives different options, but just for doing blacksmith upgrades p2 is not worth it. I would like to see a different solutions to the problem like: Moving some champions to p2, moving unique techs to p2, moving unique buildings to p2(Theatron, persian, mauryan, gallic and spartan ´palaces´). What also might be an option is giving each unit a 10%( or respectively 5%) attack boost per age advancement and to compensate put the attack upgrades at 5%(respectively 10%) increase and 1/3rd(respectively 2/3rd) of the cost. Response to soloooy0: I think that could help but I would suggest it would only be part of the solution. So it is an upvote for me, but I think we still need more.

I had indeed all the requirement, but I had another mod active that changed the fonts. Seems like that was the problem since I seem now to be able to play the game with autociv.

I installed Autociv, but after that i joined the lobby and saw that the mod blocked me from all the games in the lobby since I was using a mod. Is this meant to be?

I think these are good suggestions. What I would suggest similar to point 3, is the following(Maybe Dragonoar meant the same thing): Most players put their buildings on a control group and then we get an Icon on the Left of the screen. I would be nice if that icon would contain a bar(or the green shade we see when selecting the building) which provides information on the progress of the unit creation. So you will be able to notice if a unit is in training and how long it takes to pop out. Also the amount of units that you train could be shown. For the I need resources button, In MP would it be an idea that if you press a key (for example like tab), a drop-down menu appears and it shows how many resources your allies have. In that case you don´t need to ask team mates if they have excess resources, but rather can check it for yourself. On the other hand, this might have negative impact with players demanding that you send your excess resources to them.

I have been able to play on the newest version last sunday. I registered on an older version and then installed the newest version. I did not really get the hang on what competetive 0AD really is, but that might come later. Anyway: On the linux mint repositories there are 2 0AD versions. For windows users: repositories are great and linux users prefer only to download things from repositories, because if software is good it is in the repositories. The outdated one is from the official linux mint repositories and one is directly from the play0ad site. I tried to read the description, but I could not find if there was a difference. It could be just me, however I think most new players won´t be able to tell which download is the most recent version.

I have only played a few games on 0AD, so by no means I am an autority and neither do I have anything to say how the game should work out. However if I am correct, this game has strategies like a sneaky ram push. Like how is that supposed to be sensible? I saw an user saying that the pierce damage is a problem and thrust damage could be included to circumvent the problem is just giving the spearmen a bonus damage. The same thing also goes for other types of siege equipment as spears have trouble killing them as well. Edit: something I wanted to add: Ramms are faster than elephants. Not only they are sturdy but they are also fairly fast if I am correct. On top of that is that the ramms can move while being chased down therefore their speed makes it troublesome to kill them.

I have been able to register now. I wasn´t able to play a game, since it seems that my version (apha XXII: venustas ) is an outdated version.

Similar as posted earlier, I get an error. I installed 0AD from the linux mint repositories and tried to register in game. There were two different versions of the game in the linux mint repositories, so I don´t know if that makes a difference. Registry seemed to work and I saw in the screen that registry was successful, but when I tried to connect, it said autentication failed. Username: LetswaveaBook edit: I have installed apha XXII: venustas