Grautvornix

Sounds great - for a cool "prequel" to the introductory tutorial!

Humble suggestion to improve the 0AD homepage: Wouldn't it be useful to update the revision log on the 0AD homepage (at least once a month- while nightly built, so potentially manually mentioning the major changes in SVN) ? Currently it still looks like development has stalled - which is not true at all. You know: "do good stuff and talk about it"

Happy and prosperous New Year to everyone in the 0AD community!

Sounds cool to have really good maps as part of the main game! It is indeed important to have high quality maps visibly associated to the game. However, I'd be in favour of keeping also the more mediocre maps accessible in vanilla to preserve variety, e.g. as "user supplied maps, maps to be improved etc. As I reported already: with the game "settlers" the mapping community alone kept the (commercial) game alive for more than 25 years and still counting (cf. www.siedler-maps.de/ ) It would be lovely to see mapping community for 0aD as active as for the various settlers games... Possibly, 0aD - while being a game strongly linked to actual history - might also provide imaginary maps scenarios that come with a conundrum to solve (e.g. there is not enough of one resource, you find the right place for your CC, create the right alliances etc. etc.) Apologies for this excursion,particularly as I am not (yet) able to provide my own maps. Still slow in learning...

I'm loving it!

1.) Water should always be usable for naval purposes (sideflank your enemy, access a new region, access new resources...) 2.) It might be an obstacle that can be crossed (by verssels anyway but also by bridges? Just saying...) and also

Yep, I get your point. No worries!

From an SP perspective, I should add, that constrained maps (where some resource, or space, or anything else is scarce) can be also also quite fascinating in its own way. Players need to carefully plan their build sequence and cannot just follow e.g. a standard boom strategy.

Frankly (while I do agree that there are large differences in map quality), I am not so much in favour of dumping exisitng maps. This game delivers its fascination from historical reference, the number of Civs, and the diverse, beautiful maps. Dumping the less beautiful half of them would certainly increase average quality but als reduce variety. In fact I am already missing a few maps that used to be available in A23 etc. Part of the fun as an SP is a large number of very different maps to try with different Civs. Lastly, a bad map has at least the potential to trigger improvement. Instead, could we possibly mark the 50% bad maps as "maps for proposed improvement" or would you consider this pointless/hopeless?

I like the idea of caves as a map element as well. If you happen to discover one it could be a "wormhole" to another part of the map. But I also like the idea of roads ("flat" walls on land that can be walked on) and bridges (walls in water that can be walked on).

Oops! Sorry! Thank you very much!

Just a small observation: 0AD homepage does not list any updates since August 2024. Visiting the website it looks like project is stalled which is obviously not true at all. I know that the migration to Gitea is not complete an there might be some issues with the revision logs (not visible in SVN update either, says only "nightly build" instead - or am I doing something wrong?).

And don't forget that some casual SP enjoy building up a Civ on a beautiful map and have only occasional conflicts until the final showdown. It is certainly not competitive but another way to have fun.

Sorry, could not stop phantatasizing: There could be three additional elements: - roads ("buildable buildings/flat walls placed on land, and that can be walked on by everyone, providing a speed bonus") - bridges ("roads on a wall through water") - ramps ("bridge on land") Now imaginge: - the effect of building a bridge through a river that actually blocks ships like a wall blocks an army on land. Of course the bridge could be attacked by a ship (like a wall by an army). - Civs having poor naval skill could instead have good building techs so they can reach that close island with a bridge (I suggest a maximum length needs to be defined) - effect of a ramp to access that mountain plateau that has precious resources or that is only accessible from a well protected side. Of course ramps can be destroyed by anyone. (Owner will be Gaia even if you built it yourself!) - the effect of a road into enemy territory that not only accelerates own troops but also the enemy during his counter attack. Roads would need to be protected. /end phantasizing All this would need considerable amount of changes and certainly is to be defined and assessed carefully in all consequences. A mod would be a good candidate to test such things. I would volunteer implementing it if I could do it at all.

... or actually build roads and bridges? Kind of a special building? A bridge could cross water or represent a ramp to a cliff. This would mean allowing to build elements that would be finally owned by Gaia (very much like some watch towers) - but that can be walked on, then giving a speed bonus and that can be added to and destroyed as well? Destroyed by artillery or ships, I mean. Wild, wild dreams... (unfortunately I am not able to contribute coding at all. I know it is always easy to express some wild ideas and expext others to do the hard work)