real_tabasco_sauce

plenty of us did, and I can tell you it is like playing a different game. Imagine a racing game where the steering is done for you. It takes about 6 seconds of observation to tell who is using it or not.

pay to win.

No, but because of the balance, they can become front and center for winning the game. AFAIK there are builds for civs that are specifically designed to 'cheese' an early sacred site victory. I think I saw this in a aussie drongo video.

You know all 4 of the civ "versions" are just going to be massively PTW versions of the original civs to force people to buy the expansion. Also saves a ton of art development effort. That's so messed up.

About time they added some content XD. Hopefully its not goofy. edit: its all goofy

Well then just set it to "defensive" if you don't want to be attacked as soon. But to say it is not human like is misktaken: the typical multiplayer game lasts about 10 to 30 minutes depending. Most players consider rams to be balanced or a little weak. If you want them changed, you could mod it for your scenarios.

not sure about 1000, but 3000 would be a reasonable short term change. I would also support further reducing the territory increase each age. it would be true that the rng of having extra metal and stone nearby would have a much bigger effect as well. I have mentioned this before, but I don't think the starting metal and stone should be so close to the cc. I think it would be good to randomly choose a radius and angle for each, within a reasonable range of the cc. Sorry to go so far of topic XD.

You can set this in game setup btw, if you would like 200 more.

Also, look here: https://code.wildfiregames.com/differential/query/all/ There is plenty of recent work in this direction.

The point is that you need a strong economy in order to afford all of your scheming here. If you find yourself 'saving up' for every tower and fortress you want, then chances are that's why the AI seems so fast to you. I suggest you spend the first 15 minutes investing in economy so that you have enough resources and workers to carry out your plans.

I believe this is your solution.

No, plenty of original effort went into the towers and forts in 0ad. The fact of the matter is that this is a videogame, and making everything into a reality simulator makes the game boring. For example, lets make all the buildings take hours to build. Nice. Also, we can let sicknesses randomly kill a unit every 5 seconds. Nice.

Well of course if you put a lot of players on a small or tiny map, things don't generate as intended. But I did a bunch of typical 1v1 and team game arrangements and everything looked as expected. I suppose it is a bit weird, but the abundance of hunt could make this biome play very differently, with players migrating cavalry earlier on to get more hunt and win map control.

Yeah they are all basically giving a bunch of placement options to random maps. rmgen1 and 2 are basically just two different map generation approaches. if you select a random map you will see that the option for “team placement” near “biome” has been set to random. you can try leaving it in random and generating a few maps. If you like some more that others you can just select the placement you want. known issues: “alternating circle” and “grouped circle” are reversed, so selecting grouped will actually give you alternating placement. ”river” is a bit counterintuitive

@andy5995 are you still heading up the git for the community maps mod? Any chance you could update it with this? It works for a26 and a27. I also asked @badosu directly on mod.io but I doubt he will respond.

I imagine the enemy AI would also have to be allied to this 'player 3'

@Gurken KhanI have a patch for it, but I suppose I could add it as a mod here.map_placement.zip This mod also has all the maps from https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4948 and related patches, so if you can test other maps as well that would be great. I know migration works for a26 and a27, but I don't know if the others will work as well.

I suppose I should have added the option for "keep both"

Which migration map generation do you like better? (use the screenshots as reference) Old migration: 3000 wood instantly as a "Treasure Resource", no trees other than starting trees. Island radius is 1/2 new migration island radius Central continent is larger and skewed off center. Players spawn right next to each other and Islands run together with higher player count. New migration: Small woodlines depending on biome, ~130 ± 15 trees per player. Savannah generations get 1 hunt per island. Island radius is 2x larger than old migration island radius. Central continent is centered and typically smaller. Players spawn either circle grouped or circle alternating, Always with enough space between each other.

Yeah, arguably there is less historical accuracy to train them from the stables, no?

Slingers when Vercingetorix shows up:

Much improved migration script. https://code.wildfiregames.com/D5129 Use radial spawning so that players may be either grouped with their team or spread out.Use space more efficiently: larger islands, more spacious islands. Main 'continent' is located in the center.Fix player islands merging with higher player counts (even on medium map size)Make starting islands larger and give them wood. Reason: players should not be forced to leave their home island, but instead decide a good time to leave to fight for control over the middle.Savannah generation gets 1 group of main huntable animal since there is little wood, giving the biome a considerable effect on gameplay, depending on the animal.

well that too, but I was talking about the oxford comma XD.

In favor of? I thought it was decided to use American English as default, but metric for measurements. Oh no, I meant I thought most people nowadays use the comma because its more legible, logical, and sensible. In other words, I thought the comma users triumphed.

interesting, I thought the debate was settled on this.