real_tabasco_sauce

@Gurken Khan This seems reminiscent of the following issue from a26 rc: Basically, the OS (macOS, might have been Big sur iirc) of the computer burrito was using had some issue with silhouettes and @vladislavbelov was able to account for it. Are you using an old(ish) operating system?

yes, that is the idea. But it worked too well lol. I watched 75 spearmen basically vanish to 10 eles.

Eles will need a nerf 100%. I am thinking just changing the splash should suffice: 20 hack and 20 crush.

https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4970 You should be able to easily make a mod based on this patch. From my own experience, there is a steep tradeoff between pathing and overlapping. If units push each other too hard, pathing becomes disastrous, with units walking in place or even moonwalking. Also, 0 overlap means women may kick each other off of berries for example. I have seen them go through perpetual motion like this lol. just like a newtons cradle. I found a pretty good 'middle ground' in the comments in that post, so that might be a good place to start from.

Thats simply because the swordcav in p1 patch was good (balance, differentiation, etc, etc, etc,) and the last 5 things you have suggested are bad (numerous reasons). Your complete absence of respect for anyone is creepy.

Just say you are terrible at the game and want it to be easier for yourself, because that is what I am beginning to understand from you.

ah thats it. Yeah, I have it on because it fixes screen tearing I get from vulkan. Once it is on, things are very, very smooth so I prefer it on.

One thing is that FPS throttling seems to have no effect in a27. I can set it lower or unlimited, and its always around 60 fps.

https://superuser.com/questions/1146874/how-to-install-two-versions-of-software-under-windows-10

I think changing the location of the first 0ad, then installing the new 0ad should work. Not sure how the user config files will be handled, but I can run both with different graphics and mod selections (on macos). Maybe windows doesnt handle that smoothly idk.

Ok no worries, I could successfully download from here: https://releases.wildfiregames.com/rc/

Only the ARM download worked on firefox. Seems like the ARM download works everywhere/ x64 didnt work for chrome,safari, or firefox. I think just the ARM link was fixed.

The links still don't work for me. Anyone else have this problem?

Nobody will listen to your ideas if all you want to do here is hate. You have to realize that popular and plausible changes are made, and that fringe out-of-scope changes are not. If you expect you can personally redirect the design of the game, I am sorry.

Nice! hopefully that will eliminate players being discouraged thinking the game is malware.

@Stan` is the signing issue referring to apple signed applications so that ppl don't get the 'malware' warning, or is this for actually making the bundle?

Neither of these links work btw. There are no unnecessary buildings, just some buildings which are not as impactful as others. Fortresses are for defense and heroes/unique upgrades if applicable. Allowing all units to be trained at the fort would be redundant and messy.

I guess this is kind of an aside, but It is very weird behavior to maintain multiple accounts. I just don't understand the point, is it exciting? I can understand longtime players coming back with a funny name to prank people in the lobby, but maintaining and sharing smurf accounts, multiple lobby accounts and claiming to be different people is just plain weird.

The plague

you could also set the body decay time to 0 so that tons of dead bodies don't need to be kept track of. I think this is in template_unit.xml, not sure what else you would have to change.

range query range or aggro range?

Wow, I actually never realized this. Garrisoning turret points does not affect territory decay. That seems like a problem to me.

Unfortunately, I failed to double the siege wall garrison space like I did with all the other walls. Some people will probably not like that inconsistency, and it means it will remain a chore to keep the walls from being captured. Fortunately the siege walls are fairly easy to destroy if I remember correctly.

I think that was actually brought up by @wowgetoffyourcellphone. (to change all walls). Yeah I think it would be fine to grant siege walls the exception to territory decay. After all, they already have the exception of being built in enemy territory.

if "buildings" are allowed a capture attack, siege towers could be the only unit capable of capturing walls. Let the garrisoned units modify the capture attack (by quantity), then units from the siege tower could garrison the wall once it is captured. Also, if I CC drop an enemy base, it would be good for their walls to become mine.