real_tabasco_sauce

yeah I did it manually in game, but you could also do it manually in the user.cfg or maybe local.cfg. If you see hotkeys set in default.cfg that are not in user.cfg or ur local.cfg then you can add the lines to those file with new values.

Great, thank you!

@Mentula are you familiar with a user.cfg option to increase mouse scroll speed (or panning speed)? I know this can be changed in game via a hotkey, but the change does not persist, so it would be nice to set this in the user config.

It shouldn't be all that tedious. I have done a lot of hotkey switching recently and it worked out well. You can just choose one unused key (I chose super, which is command on mac). Alternatively you could boot something like "follow" off of f so it is readily accessible to your left hand.

Yes, and for some civs, like I mentioned earlier, they align so that the upgrade is directly below each corresponding unit.

Yeah thats what I have done here, except they are in the barracks/stable. In the forge, these would be very crowded, while in production buildings, they are less crowded and their association with each unit class is clear.

Yep! It's all working flawlessly. Thanks for making a bundle @Stan`!

I tried this version on mac with moltenVK. Nothing seemed out of the ordinary until I turned texture texture quality to high. At hight texture quality, it does something like this: (the video is from an earlier test I did) ultra_high_shadows.mp4 After lowering textures back to medium/low, the glitched textures remain. There is screen tearing when panning while using default settings. Someone told me it's not possible, but turning on vsync fixes them perfectly and results in very smooth panning. I would say vulcan gives me an average of 10 to 15 more fps, which is impactful, but more importantly I do not get stutters or frame rate drops that I noticed frequently before.

In my opinion, this a little too dumbed down, I appreciate more nuanced prices that we currently have, and I think 3 resources in a technology can be ok, depending. If all siege units were wood metal, it would be a little too easy to quickly switch from using rams to catapults.

you could just copy the first few hundred lines to a file and upload that.

What were u playing? a26? the development version? Using a mod? I had my mainlog balloon some when testing the vulcan backend on mac without the spirv mod. This was accompanied by a small army of pyrogenesis processes that ate up a ton of RAM. My mainlog only got up to like 10mb but if you have a high end computer I could see it going far past that.

I see what you mean, but it would also be weird to have prices too divided. (metal for techs, stone for buildings, food/wood for units would be the other extreme). The main thing with these upgrades is that they shouldn't be too easy or hard to get compared to forge techs, and they should be accessible alongside forge techs. If they cost too much wood/metal, then they become mutually exclusive with forge techs. Thats why a portion of it is food. I think if one of the three should be dropped, it should be wood, what do you think? Something like this: tier 1: 75 food, 125 metal tier 2: 150 food, 250 metal

yeah I mentioned that earlier, but I guess it was buried in my rather long post. I'd say overall its something we should try again for a27. Not sure @Stan` if it should be a new "main" branch. Would the old a26 version then just be a branch of main? Maybe it should be a separate project?

I see. I would say most players saw it as a success, probably because of the faster turnaround on new content. With regards to splitting the community, I think this could be improved going forward. The primary reason to play the community mod (at least early on) was because of its bugfix for the Han farming techs. Because of this, the community mod became the default version of the game for a large group of players. So, subsequent versions were heavily vetted with voting to ensure only guaranteed improvements were merged. What resulted was in my eyes, a much less ambitious version compared to the possibilities the community mod provides. My thoughts are if the mod adopts a more experimental approach, like a community test environment, the majority of games will take place on a27, with those curious to try out new content playing occasionally on the mod. With this more experimental approach, both players and contributors should be more welcoming to ambitious content, which may be imbalanced, or otherwise sub-optimal. The "risk" of playing the mod would be that some things may be bad changes and some may be great changes, and to avoid this risk, I imagine players would prefer vanilla 0ad rather than playing the community mod alone.

Vulcan is the roman god of fire tho.

Again, any feedback on prices? Maybe this part doesn't matter so much at the moment, perhaps we could just adjust prices as needed for balance.

Hi @Stan`, @wraitii, What will the plan be for updating the community mod with the a27 simulation files? I presume that wall change is one of the last changes to these files, so conceivably the repository could be setup for a27 even before the actual release right? This way I could start putting some ideas together — Melee damage increase, han crossbow nerf, unit specific upgrades, siege tower capture attack, maurya hero aura, crush armor adjustment. I could also get @borg-'s sparta ideas in the community mod.

Oh I see, this would stratify the rows. As it is already committed, I'd say we can bookmark that option for later in case the issue comes up again.

@nifa don't get me wrong, its a nice idea, but I think effort here would be better if put towards improving idle animations.

Yeah that was my main concern. There is an amount of flexibility needed on both sides of the wall for different wall lengths to accommodate the wall turrets. This is what I meant by soldiers "in" walls. If there is a truly random assignment, then it's likely you would also see some soldiers "in" other soldiers. A random assignment couldn't (if not, it definitely shouldn't) be done in xml. A separate script or function would be needed. Honestly, I think the neat rows allow an easier guess as to how many soldiers are up there and the random positioning looks kind of chaotic. I would also add that its not that unrealistic that the columns are perfect. Lastly, it would be strange to do this for walls and not formations, which would then open another can of worms.

They do play idle animations, it's just some animations are harder than others to notice. Positioning in the walls is fixed as the turret positions are pre-defined. It's likely that randomizing their positions would result in soldiers inside of soldiers, soldiers inside of walls, and other more unrealistic things XD. If you are looking for a more disorganized appearance, they do take up positions on the wall in a random-appearing order. It looks pretty "random" when there are 10 out of 16 soldiers on the wall. I personally don't mind the neat rows as it looks like they are ready to launch some volleys.

I don't think every civ needs every ship type. For one, Having a missing element of a soft counter system is not a disaster, the player will need to recognize this weakness and take precautions. For two(?), this discrepancies could be made up by unique upgrades, unique "special" ships (ie fireship, we should think of 1 or 2 more), and naval civ bonuses.

This is a great direction to take naval combat.

What do people think of the prices? 100f,w,m for town phase upgrades and 200 f,w,m for city phase? Obviously some will be more valuable than others depending on the civ, but is 300 and 600 resources total too much? My worry is that the price will make them unused by comparison to the blacksmith upgrades. That being said, they shouldn't be so cheap that you can quickly pick them all up, the idea is to "tech into" a certain unit type and afford to switch to another depending on your opponents strategy.

any balancers want to give their two cents on phabricator? https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4914