Grautvornix

On MS Windows 10 you can find it in /users/<username>/AppData/Roaming/0ad/config (at least that's where I find it on my installation)

I absolutely agree! Let's focus on other, more important topics!

Noooo! I did not intend to start a discussion about the name of the game! There are really more important things to address - "Zero A D" is fully ok! (apologies for bringing this up)

It is a bit embarrassing but that is new to me (my excuse: never heard anyone talking about the game - never watched Youtube with sound on). I actually though "null A D" was the game's proper name. Would you refer to it as "zero A D" instead? (don't want to start flame wars but to me Null-A-D is shorter and flows much better (at least in German )

Welcome to the forum! Which verison o the game are you running ? A0.26 or SVN (A0.27) ?

Well, I guess this is because he is actually in charge of DE, isn't he? Edit: and the post by @carpinchonegro was specifically about helping with DE which is made & maintained by @wowgetoffyourcellphone. A phantastic job by the way!

Sorry, me again - now I understand (bit slow today - should have read the documentation/tool tips), every additional harvesting unit on a field slows down the yield , but the overall yield of each field is still infinite. Thanks for the explanations!

Wow! Thanks Stan! Was not aware at all: When I am playing, I have really PLENTY of food in the end (>10k) from 4 fields despite I train troops like hell. (this led me into thinking more fields would be a waste of resources) Most likely I could train more and at a faster rate. I never noticed it due to my questionable playing skills (but still having fun) I am continuously learning new details! Thanks a lot!

Of course you are right! Was just referring to my casual SP strategy. BTW - did not notice a diminishing yield in the current game (A26). Has that been implemented in SVN (A27) yet? Is there a plan for a strategy to counter this, e.g. like adding fertilizer, selecting more fertile soil, adding water or the like?

Well, unfortunately I do not have set statistics on the mandartory numbers of entities build up. (I just play for leisure ) So, in DE, I typically start with many citizens and only a few troops, just sufficient to construct buildings and defend against rushing enemies or attacking beasts. In OAD vanilla (i.e. non-modded), I use women in groups of five mainly for fruit gathering and farming while the troops are to construct buildings and chop wood (later dig for stone and metal). Scouting cavalry is always good for hunting chicken initially, then other game (sheep, goats, horses or whatever is available - be careful with wild beasts like wolfes, lions, bears, hippos and elephants. They will chase and kill you if attacked). In OAD vanilla game, my split is typically 20 women (= 4 fields) plus possibly a few more if there is a wood shortage not allowing further training of troops. They are able to cut wood/mine stone and metal as well, but are a bit less effective. Make sure that you do not focus too much on stone and metal initially, i.e. in the village phase. Food and wood is basically all you need beeore entering the town phase. BTW, somewhere in the forum there are guides for effective booming, e.g. this one: Hope this helps a bit! Best regards, Grautvornix

Indeed this aura is also helpful if defending against an attack while being healed...

As far as I am aware, the in-game feedback agreement covers only config and any difficulties of the game starting, so your own recordings might be gone unfortunately. (I guess Wildfire games would not be able to support recording all games played worldwide - apart from all the privacy concerns this would most likely create) Maybe you can find a couple of other players' replays in this forum?

Actually, I do like the Gaul fanatics as they are available realtively early in game at relatively low cost. Maybe it is not a good strategy, but it is just what I do when I play Gauls.

@Vantha sounds like a good proposal to me! (especially since it appears to be rather difficult avoiding to double information (stable and various cavalry types might all refer to the horse breed etc.) It may make much more sense to provide the texts and then hyperlink to them what ever applies ( so stabels will link, sword cavalry might also link to the horse breed, but also to the sword technology they used). Wonder how we could organise these links? Do the texts themselves, then in a second round verify all units refer to something, and then edit the referring page with some text connecting the various fragments pointed to? Just thinking aloud...

Interesting point, though I wonder if anyone is actually looking for a new game according to its cool name? For me, it was the appearance and some cool screenshots that got me interested originally...

Happy New Year to everyone at WFG and their supporters and fans and everyone! May the world become a more peaceful place with warfare becoming only a domain of great games like 0aD!

@wowgetoffyourcellphone : My first reaction would be: if we cannot decide for the background color scheme we might want to make it user-selectable (I know: it is yet another parameter) On the other hand, the encyclopedia, while possibly part of the game package, might still deserve a certain distinction from the overall game style to make it stand out a bit more as reference material.

I do like the idea proposed by @jonbaer . This should possibly be more a default setting that can be changed, e.g. in the game settings: General Strategy = "according to selected hero & civ" (for suggested reading: link to 0aD library) or "manual override as defined in the standard game settings independent of selected civ/hero" (still need to find the right words here) .

Indeed I also favor beige and white as the white background looks well balanced and also increases readability of the text.

As also suggested in this threat, the wall could very well be owned by one of the factions provided we find a balancing mechanism that provides disadvantages for the faction owning the wall. This would be more historical than a neutral wall separating two (or several) factions. As an example, such balancing disadvantage could be fewer resources for the wall-owning civ. In fact, I could even magine a scenario where one faction is placed in the centerpiece of the map surrounded by walls and several other factions surrounding this area can be available for attack or support. Alternatively, a scenario like the siege of Alesia by the Romans would be interesting. Here, the centerpice would be a fortified Gallic city with Romans surrounding it between own double walls (having however not many resources) and support troops arrive from outside. Just phantasizing...

Would not mind having the wall belong to one of the factions (like in the limes case or for Hadrian's wall - or the great chinese wall). In return to this "unfair" advantage we might want to deplete resources a bit on their side, e.g. less stone or metal. Alternatively, a more complex scenario could be envisaged where the faction owning the wall would be threatended by Gaia on their own side, e.g. a village that was originally a peaceful ally would turn into hostilities after a certain time. This would try mimicking treason as happened in many cases in history (must be scripted - trigger could be an attack by the adversary or whenever anyone crosses the wall).

Looks beautiful!

I have to admitt I do like this a lot! Reminds me of my past playing settlers IV (and before) where resources must be available nearby where they are needed. Will download the mod and try it.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone Awesome! This implements a good deal of what we discussed in Looking forward to testing it!

@alreThese non-naval civs could possibly have specific coastal defense options offering a different counter strategy. It might not be very historical nor interesting in the sense of gameplay to just equip them with the same capability as naval civs. If I may, here are some rough ideas for coastal defense options: a finite max population of fire ships that can be built (something like the Iberians), say, 12 max at any time, after the technology was researched (BTW, I'd love to see fire ships generally having an "ignition" or "attack" command starting to countdown , instead of just starting it when cosntruction is finished, so one could build a few in reserve preparing a defense and place them strategically like a kind of sea mines - that could add interesting strategic options. I believe however these should not have a "proximity fuse" but need to be manually activated (good timing would then be crucial). military harbours ("sea forts") that fire back on ships (like the Britons have?). These could either be more resistant to ship artillery fire (most likely difficult to distinguish from land artillery fire), or create a higher damage to ships when firing back, or have a longer attack range, or provide an enforcement/protection aura for own (smaller melee ships) Also attack range and damage of artillery ships might need to be carefully balanced so that they can only attack buildings at the immediate coastline. For further damage at land one would need to disembark the troops. A typical defense scenario for such non-naval civs could then look like a wall and towers placed a bit off the coast..