Grautvornix

Fundamentally, a campaign is a series of scenarios/maps that have to be played in sequence (i.e. once you win part 1 you will have access to part two etc.) and that build on each other. The storyline is ideally meant to be provide historical background. Unfortunately (or not) it is not possible to carry over results of the previous campaign scenario onto the next one, i.e. you start with a small army in game 1 and end up with a larger army, which n turn saves as the basic setting for game 2, etc. I believe the challenge would be to orchestrate dynamically allocated balancing from game to game.

Being able to build roads as a start (without rails so far ) would be a nice new feature for 0AD as it is. Roads could increase movement speed of everyone (including your adversary) compared to moving through forest and grassland. Pathfinding is the main issue here unless the path is preferably following the road ( so nothing to be found). Pathfinding strategy could be to follow the shortest road through the system and only revert to the original pathfinding scheme at the end of that road. Roads have been discussed few times already but we never progressed so far. As an example in this thread:

Citiziens, civilians, non soldiers, what ever you want to call it - just strictly speaking, all members of your army except the mercs are also citizens, right?

@LienRag I like that idea, and it has indeed some potentially interesting gameplay twists!

It must be hundreds if not thousands! This feature is definitely long awaited!

Unfortunately many. Too many. Far too many. And for what? Seriously.

Excellent point! Forgot about it completely - thanks for reminding ! So far I always did that manually...

While you are right with respect to the current game, a roundtrip could even deliver more profit, as the total distance travelled could even be longer (profit relates to distance in game). Tried to establish such a roundtrip scheme but is does not seem to work. What appears to work (at least using trader ships) is to define a specific path to follow. I did that to avoid being attacked in that route, but it might be possible to maximize trade income by defining a longer detour. Did anyone check this can work? Or is the distance travelled just measured "as the crow flies" i.e. shortest connection between origin and destination?

It is possible to quickly inflate the trading yield when selling one good for another. Here is the link:

Oh, and of courser not every stone quarry should offer an entrance to a cave system. It must be discovered. This might be an option to mine more stone over a longer period. In a typical game, stone appears to be a resource that is used in larger quantities mostly during build up.

The difficulity is of course the actual game mechanic: a building to walk on, not like a wall, not like a field. For sure not easy to implement, hence this might remain a dream. Ah - one more I remember from Settlers 5 that was fun: - tunnels/caves - you could discover and enter them, and then surface again on another place on the map (teleporting is a feature we have already iirc). Of course this works for both sides. To add more fun, the entry would be blocked by stone (a stone quarry). Once the stone is removed you have a secret passage to another part of the map. Watchout - it can also be used by your adversary if he discovers it!

If I may dream: Walls that protect against projectiles if behind a wall, except for "artillery" Abitlity to build a bridge (Settlers 5 had that) - this could preconfigured sites on the map where the path crossing a river or so is initially blocked (like a closed locked gate) but "somehow" indicating a bridge could be built here. Building a bridge basically means creating a building animation and when finished opening the path ("unlocking the gate") thus allowing crossing the bridge - similar to opening a gate in a wall or palisade. The mechanics must however be inverted: default closed for everyone. Only if the bridge exists the path is open - but for everyone. Interesting gameplay could be that you could destroy bridges as well thus closing the path again. Ability to build roads that have a speed aura for everyone following them. Adding water as a kind of resource - i.e. building a field in the desert does not make much sense unless you are close to an oasis (open water body) or build a well or fountain to get water from underground (romans of course build aquaeducts ). Crop yield could be low if no water with a limited lifetime of the field, and high if water is provided by a nearby source. For existing maps, the well house is the only possible source of water. For new maps, an area around water bodies (oasis, rivers, lakes, ponds...) could be defined that allows farming. On desert maps this could force players to fight for water access.

Let me split a hair here: While some Germans are already playing it, the game will have Germanic tribes, right? (OMG, what a bean counter I am!)

Possibly a flooded meadow

Are you sure? II believe it may be available in the SVN version ahead of time.

Switching between Vulkan and Open GL can be done in Game Options | Graphics (advanced)

From my point of view absolutely. The entire game should be paused while this dialog is open so that the user can read, understand and decide. Otherwise the dialog might remain open for some time as there is always action on the map.

My preference would a "next" button - just in case you are a bit distracted or it takes a bit longer to read, then you might miss that page. Also, if you introduce a preset timeout, there will be arguments both to reduce it and to increase it depending on whom you ask. Making that "next" a user decision avoids these discussions.

@VanthaVery well done! Thank you very much!

Beautiful! Thank you very much!

Alternatively, we might as well close this discussion...

@wraitiiNothing big, but, maybe it is time to change the title of this threat? (I'd suggest to remove reference to A26 as people may believe this is outdated which is not true at all)

This could be a great solution to this bug/exploit:

An issue may be to match the character and style of the text to that naming convention. If it was a "page", "item" or "point" then it would refer to more sober academic style, while naming it "epic","verse" or the like it would require a bit more stylish language. And that might need to be adapted to the respective subject and region, e.g. are we talking about something in ancient Greece or Rome, or in a Britannic, Indian, Persian or East Asian environment.