Atrik

The majority of comments here are coming from SP players afaik giving opinion on what MP should be. It is... puzzling. They also post elsewhere that MP community have too much influence on game development (??!!). So this is definitely a troll topic that cannot be taken even the slightest seriously. As for fun, MP players also play for fun. There will never be 'pros' players on a free game, they are just designated this way when they are regular players.

Each biome have different resource availability/scarceness. It definitively have an impact on game-play. It also has an impact of civilizations balance.

Thanks to all contributors who figured and made this patch! Langbart ultra op. https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/issues/7714 Tested over couple of games it definitely feel like reverting the 'a27 lags'. Similar feedback from @0 calories. No more climax 4-12 fps lags or camera/gui unresponsiveness . Sharing the patch for those who'd like to try it. And get reasonable fps again... To apply on linux, (if you built the game) put the patch in your game folder lagpatch.patch Apply the patch: patch -p1 < lagpatch.patch Recompile: cd build/workspaces/gcc make -j3

Yes On low wood maps, it's even pretty common to gather a female battalion to support an attack.

They can be used as key defenders in a lot of situations. Also thanks to cheaper loom from @real_tabasco_sauce. @Stockfish even went as far as to attempt offensives with Spartans females

There are a lot of frustrations linked to production that can be addressed. Here are 3 features, from most basic to most advanced that can improve gaming experience. Fix 'bugs'. Suggested by @guerringuerrin. Also implemented similar feature after his idea in Moderngui. Help visualize idle buildings. (Moderngui) Centralize production management. (Moderngui's 'ecopanels') I'm pretty happy to be able to say that thanks to Moderngui the frustrations that i also used to experience from production management are past history for me. Just commenting ideas and personal experience/preferences.

Weird, maybe missing a redirect when unlogged. @Stan`

DoctorOrgans is the best here.

https://replay-pallas.wildfiregames.ovh/Replays Nice stats here with graphics.

@MarcusAureliu#s the hotkey used is the very basic : session.attack It's F by default since a27, for "Force Attack". It's likely you'll want to use this when (alt or shift) sniping to avoid units to start gathering if you miss-click (in a forest for example). However it's not as good as it used to be with a26 "Ctrl" for "Attack" since now this isn't going to make an "attack move" in case you miss-click, so units will walk into suicide instead......... It would be interesting to know if someone was able to restore "Ctrl + Alt" sniping behavior from a26, which was: attack target if possible, else attack move. @roscany A gui button is likely to be added if this is implemented. But players that don't use mouse nor keyboard are kind of an exception.... Also as previously stated, it's not going to impact you that much relative to now. The current method of sniping will still be optimal in most cases. This would be like an alternative for less spamy clicks, but less efficient, and most use cases will be to avoid baiting and for pathing in general.

If this feature do provides an alternative to alt of shift spam clicks for targeting ranged units, it is not the only problem it solves. Alt and especially shift clicking with small selection (8 units for ex) would likely still be often more optimized. This, instead provides a solution to frustrating scenario where you need to make hundreds of clicks just to avoid catastrophic outcomes: Hero dance, is often asymmetrical micro for the player doing it, because defender needs to make tones of clicks very very fast just to avoid 0 damage dealing of your entire army. With box targeting, you can react to it with a single command instead (you might need to repeat it every few secs, but it's not as spammy). Overkills, when foes are placed in a way where your entire army will shoot at a single unit, there was no way to prevent it but making a full sniping cycle. With box targeting you can avoid this, just by hovering units you intended to shoot at, and not the single most closest enemy. Pathing, a lot of times, using attack move leads to weird army behavior where half of your units just move away the intended direction to chase a meaningless unit, like a cav, a female, a unit that just spawned out of a barrack in the back of the enemy base you are attacking.... Box Targeting allow you to define where do units need to go and fight instead. Basically all cases where you feel like your units get side-tracked for arbitrary reasons, you have a feature to avoid these situation. @ffm2 @roscany, I don't think this feature is adding complexity, to the contrary: It's a single command that solve multiple micro issues that previously required to learn to detect them, a lot of tricks to mitigate them, or responses when they occur. It also make perfect sens to use the existing "Force attack" hotkey, so it's not even adding a new one. This input is begging to be added, it's 5 line of codes in input.js (a few more for visual and audio effects)

I added the sounds @guerringuerrin, but for the cursor maybe @real_tabasco_sauce can help because when I try it, it impact unrelated stuff... It feels very good to handle. To test it : BoxTargeting.zip It will allow "Force Attack" Hotkey (F by default) + Selection Box to make your selection attack units hovered! I've reset the poll and assigned old votes to "no". Hoping to help this topic mature with this demo.

Thanks for posting this @Ginnungagap, means a LOT to me, you've been testing it since the nub poc, and your suggestions helped so much to bring it where it is now.

I was thinking of something that isn't even optimized, as user can already use the box selection tool to define which and approx how much units would be targeted. So basically making smaller selections if you want to really get the most out of it. I think this would make sens because in a battle, you might also gain value by choosing exactly where your ranged aim at (for example you want to weaken one of the flank for combo a cavalry charge, or because it is the closest to a fort that the enemy might retreat too at some point etc...). As for hero dancing, you would be 'immune' if you already issued a CHEAT and units in the box are still alive, or you could make a quick response with a fresh one. So I do think it mitigate it heavily. I guess AIMBOT would be feasible but indeed, more complicated, and too similar use case as patrol. Also if the main concern is that CHEAT doesn't mitigate hero dancing or any baiting, I think this isn't true. The main goal of CHEAT is to be able to make a single order to respond to baiting instead of being forced to make 300 alt clicks because someone is hero dancing.