guerringuerrin

Oh you are right, I missed that. I knew there was one more way to check stats but wasnt sure if it was vanila or some mod. I'd get rid of some stats that can be checked in the other window and lay out the combat stats a bit better to improve readability. btw, can someone explain me how to read the resistances stats? I don't understand what the percentajes in hack pierce and crush means

Yeah i mean, only way i know to see units stats is right click on the unit portrait and u got a fixed position window which covers the whole center of the screen with every stats of the unit. Also If you want to know the military upgrades of your enemy you need to check their damage and do the maths to know how many upgrades they have ( yeah, I know you can memorize this stuff for every unit......) It's OK to have all this info here but we might want to have the Combat stats in a more accesible and direct way. boonGUI had something like that (which I think you ported to ModernGUI) on the bottom bar. Very useful. I share two other examples from SC2 and AOE2 boonGUI version got some combat stats here. aoe2 example. U got Damage + Damage Upgrades Melee Armor+Upgrades/Range Armor+Upgrades SC2 U got those stats portraits which are for Armor, Ground Damage, Air Damage, and the three 0s tells you the upagrades it have. Then If you want more detailed info you can hover your mouse and that green square displays Damage, Attack Types (2 in this case), Range, and so on. The "Armored - Mechanical - Massives"are for the unit classes, as some classes are more resistant against other classes and so on

We really need a more direct and clear way to display unit stats.

yeah maybe thats the main reason. never liked WTF as it rewards ecoboting race and, as it's placed on fortress, somehow forcing defensive strat again Yeah might not need universal but feels like forcing a civ to build fortress for get the heroe feels somehow like just delaying full offensive strats.

Wouldn't it be better if all civilizations had their own building (or if some had it at the Civic Center and others had a dedicated building) instead of placing it in the Fortress? This forces you to construct a purely defensive building, except in rare cases.

That story reminded me this Credits again for https://www.instagram.com/0ad_memes_eae/?hl=es-la

@Boudica Hahaha, I knew one of those was much longer and actually a combination of three names. how could I have missed it!? In the end, this crossword was much more difficult and creative than I expected. Putting aside the controversial -but fun- technique used for some players in 0 A.D., the secret message is a true story and an activity we should all keep doing until the end. And I truly love it, so I’ll keep doing it !

The first two i didn't know about it but I missed the third!

Which am I missing!??

If JC sees how far the Ramirez family has come, he'll probably have a stroke Berries

Maybe for a better perspective might be cool to exclude this

Thats cool data to have on the summary. How is percentaje calculated? tabasco has 280 seconds idle time and burrito has 573 seconds. and yet both has 54%

okey, here's my take

Credits for: https://www.instagram.com/0ad_memes_eae

Sorry, I just forgot to share this very revealing conversation I had with a relatively new player. It's interesting how confusing it can be to think that a feature only helps you against better players, but doesn’t still give you an advantage against players at your own level. Can't blame him, I guess, in the end, we all fool ourselves a little.

Ok i might be wrong about that. Still autociv, ModernGUI and BoxTargeting are not just GUI mods, the do more than just modifes the GUI or track/format data. anyways. all have been said

100% 0adopeamine This is even better than the last one.

You'll never be able to have flawless code, but you can always build stronger code and better anti-cheat protection. This is the case with maphack, which afaik have been fixed in the latest version. Furthermore, saying that 0 A.D. is insecure just because it's open source is like saying Windows is more secure than Linux because it's closed. Security doesn’t depend on hiding the code, but on how the system is designed and what measures are in place to protect it. Not exactly true. Most—if not all—GUI changes are made by modifying the contents of the GUI folder without even touching the simulation folder. True. And I'm not in favor of enforcing any mandatory system for using certified mods or restricting mods. I'm in favor of making information about which mods are being used by all players in a match (whether signed via mod.io or verified in any other way) available to all players—or at least to the host—of the match. After that, each host can set their own rules. Yes, it’s a big challenge. And yet, here we are enjoying an incredible game developed by a community of developers and players that moves forward in many areas through discussion and consensus.

There is a skill on being aware of your military production and keeping your pop up. In fact, just yesterday a player told me he was using the autotrain feature because "it helps me keep up my population". And in the context of the (serious) discussion about this feature, sounds like an euphemism to say "it takes away brain time to come up with original strategies". Yeah, I mean the current training system is buggy in the way I've described. Is very different from a feature that instantly produces units according resources and housing available. In my opinion, you took automation to an extreme, and it does provide a clear advantage over those who don’t use that feature. And I feel frustrated that we can't even agree on that and the importance of fair play in a competitive environment. Cause might not be a super popular RTS but 0ad actually has a competitive community at some point. You’ve got a point here, as you never tried to keep your mod in the shadows, and I don’t think you’ve ever acted dishonestly. So accusing you of hiding it or being a cheater doesn’t add anything to the discussion. However, it’s currently impossible to know if someone is using it independently, and not everyone may be as honest as you in that regard and yeah, those are cheaters.

@Sesshoumaruin order to get your points you'll need to upload the commands.txt file from the replay's folder. You can check on the replay's section of the game, identify it and navigate to the file's path shown in the bottom section of the screen to get the replay folder

Just to clarify the topic of automatic transmissions in case I'm misunderstanding due to a language barrier: In most races, the transmission is semi-automatic/sequential. This means that the driver does actively shift gears, even though the system is electronically assisted. In most of the cases, no driver would choose a fully automatic gearbox, because deciding when to shift and when to downshift is key to optimizing the car’s performance (for overtaking, entering/exiting corners, etc.). And this is why going to non-gaming-related analogies can be so confusing and creates dead-end discussions. BUT if wanna keep playing with the analogy... I would compare the semi-automatic transmission to my customTrainer mod. In this case, the system automatically finds an idle barracks and assigns the units there, instead of stacking them in a barracks that’s already busy—something that forces you to constantly search for the darn idle one. We could even consider this a bug in the game, and this system comes to fix it while still respecting the “non-automation principle” (okay, I’m getting philosophical here). Now, fully automating production can result in a competitive advantage between two players of similar skill, if one of them has to spend less attention maintaining their population high while the other has to carry out repetitive production tasks. It’s also something hard to quantify—it’s more of a qualitative difference, since you can’t measure, for instance, how distracted someone might get in the heat of the moment, forgeting to check it's military production. And this is fairly obvious. The trade-off is that you lose control over batch sizes at any given time, and that can affect your economy at certain points. But you can toggle autotrain on and off. So a player could activate it during moments when they’re focused on battle and know they have enough resources for autotrain not to hurt their economy. Meanwhile, the player without autotrain is forced to constantly pay attention to their production. Atrik usually argues from the perspective of gameplay preference, which I think is totally valid. Others (like me) argue from a fair play and competitive balance standpoint (please, serious arguments—none of that “I have better hardware” or “I woke up more noob than yesterday” stuff), and I think that’s also valid. In fact, this is a discussion present in many RTS games. But the problem is that if we don’t start establishing some shared criteria for this discussion, and everyone argues from completely subjective positions, there’s no way to reach any kind of conclusion. About quickstart, a simple example: in AoE2 it’s banned. In StarCraft 2 it’s standard—your 4 Drones/Probes/SCVs automatically go straight to the minerals as soon as the game starts. And we can apply this same example to vanilla AoE2 and 0 A.D. The built-in auto-queue feature in vanilla 0 A.D. is actually banned in AoE2 and StarCraft 2—it’s only allowed in non-competitive matches. Conclusion: the scope and limitations of what’s allowed in the different ways the game can be played ultimately depend on community consensus and by having ways to enforce that consensus. Right now we keep at zone 0 here

The debate around the use of mods is a broad and somewhat controversial topic that I’ve observed since I first became part of this community. I’ve noticed that, whether in favor of or against the use of mods, many argue that it’s impossible to prevent them. Even if all players in a match (not just the host) could see which mods are active, they claim there’s no point in adding such a feature because it’s very easy to rename a mod to disguise it as something else and hide what’s actually being used. One could even inject a mod inside another mod and achieve the same result. Below, I’m sharing a sort of "white paper" outlining what I believe is a possible alternative to this issue. While it may not be free of weaknesses, it could make it significantly harder for players to deceive others. Mod Integrity Verification in 0 A.D. Objective Prevent the use of hidden or modified mods that provide unfair advantages in multiplayer games, through automatic integrity checks without compromising player privacy. Context Currently, players can install mods in two ways: As folders, which are easily editable. As .zip or .pyromod files, which are harder to modify without leaving traces. There is currently no native mechanism that allows the host to verify whether a player is using a modified mod. Proposal Implement local mod integrity verification using cryptographic checksums (e.g., SHA256), and report this data to the host. How it works On the client (player) side: When launching the game or connecting to a match: The client calculates a hash (e.g., SHA256) for each enabled mod. It generates a list with: mod name, hash, and enabled status. This list is automatically sent to the host. On the host side: The host receives the list of enabled mods and their hashes. It compares them against a predefined whitelist (for a tournament, server, or community). If mismatches are found, the host may block the connection or issue a warning. Security and privacy No file content is transmitted. There is no remote access to the player's file system. Only mod names and hashes are shared. Forging these values would require tampering with the engine or core scripts. Advantages Makes it harder to use undetectable modified mods. Promotes transparency and fair play in multiplayer sessions. Scalable for tournaments, ranked matches. Suggested implementation Add SHA256 hash computation during mod loading. Extend the multiplayer connection protocol to include mod hash information. Allow hosts or servers to define and enforce a list of accepted mod hashes. Technical considerations This system is not intended as a foolproof solution against all forms of malicious modification. While verifying and reporting mod hashes locally significantly raises the difficulty of using altered mods without detection, a technically skilled user could still modify the game engine to falsify the reported hash values. It’s also worth noting that 0 A.D. is widely used on Linux, where many users compile the game from source due to delayed updates in official repositories. In such cases, the compiled binaries may vary between users even if the source code is the same. However, this does not affect the validity of mod verification, as hash comparisons are made on the downloaded .zip or .pyromod files—whose hashes remain stable as long as their content is unmodified. Despite these limitations, the proposed system represents a meaningful step toward improving transparency and reducing the prevalence of undetected mod-based advantages, without requiring invasive anti-cheat mechanisms.

While working on a PR to incorporate hotkeys for building placement, building selection, and unit selection, I created this mod that—on top of building placement and selection—adds hotkeys to select several unit classes not covered by AutoCiv: all infantry, cavalry, champions, mercenaries, healers, heroes, and even dogs! It can be used alongside AutoCiv, although I haven’t tested it with its latest versions. There are still some features left to add, but I’d really appreciate help from anyone willing to test it and help catch any bugs I might have missed. I’d also love to publish it on mod.io, so any help with that would be greatly appreciated! To install it, just unzip BuildingHotkeys.zip and copypaste the BuildingHotkeys folder into your mod's folder Here's a demonstration video: BuildingsHotkeys mod.mp4

@Itms It might not be related to this specific RC3, but I just experienced a crash after a 30-minute game with this RC3. There were lots of serialization errors before the first window crash. I was able to click "Continue" and the game kept running. However, it crashed again when I tried to save and clicked the save button. Uploading here. I can report on gitea if neccesary Crash_rc3_250714.zip

@king reza the great, regarding the cheats you mentioned I think people don’t feel guilty about using certain mods because they don’t see them as cheats, and I believe very few players actually 'cheat knowingly' using maphacks (which I assume we can all agree are cheating) or actually hacking the game sourcecode to exploit other stuff. But one of the biggest problems is that every time this discussion comes up, it feels like we’re starting from scratch, constantly forced to redefine everything or debate overly relativistic arguments that ultimately go nowhere (difference in hardware settings, fluctuation in player performance due to outside factors?? ). The essence of fair play in any competitive setting isn’t absolute equality — which is impossible — but a shared agreement on which mods/systems/handicaps, etc are accepted in a competitive environment and which aren't. The problem in 0 A.D. is that such an agreement doesn’t exist. And the current stage of development make it impossible for hosts to technically enforce their requirements — they must rely on trust, or manually review replays to detect automation or unfair behavior. That said, those who’ve read my opinions on this topic know I have a somewhat ambiguous position — one that’s unsuccessfully tried to bridge both sides. Given how completely I’ve failed at that, I’ll just say this: I’ve also felt frustrated like you, and only by letting go of certain ambitions — which I think are nearly impossible to resolve in the game’s current state — was I able to enjoy playing again, even with people whose views on 0 A.D. I don’t share. I even feel like the overall toxicity has gone down a bit. I miss your early cav harrass gameplay. There's so much ecobots like me out there I really hope you come back to play and enjoy the game with all of us!