What do you think 0 A.D. lacks?

[Eilat]

16 hours ago, Perzival12 said:

That is why I prefer Conquest Civic Centre mode. However, it would be nice to make demands of your opponent, like requesting tribute before agreeing to an alliance or demanding a surrender.

I also want a multicultural empire where the conqueror can train units of the conquered. But is it feasible for AI to betray or rebel in the event of conquest?

[Eilat]

There are a few instances where the AI doesn't pursue and destroy all remaining units, but instead ignores them. As a result, some units rebuild their civilian centers and rise again, sometimes even conquering opponents. Observing the population or territory graphs after battle is fascinating, with sudden drops and spectacular resurgences.

[AlexHerbert]

I think would be nice that the game didn't allow to click to train a batch size if it is bigger than the pop cap you have remaining, maybe that the icon was showed red as it is showed when not enough res (So I am not housed anymore xD).. And that Han civ voices was in Chinese 

Edited January 29 by AlexHerbert

[RangerK]

Smoother transitions to new updates.  For 27, it look a lot of searching and trail and error figure out how to install auto civ.  Now there's 28, and auto civ is broken again, and I can't see basic statistics displayed while I play.  Very basic stuff like # of laborers.  I'm playing blind.

I can't be the only one with this issue.  I'm curious how others handle it.

[Seleucids]

1 hour ago, RangerK said:

Smoother transitions to new updates.  For 27, it look a lot of searching and trail and error figure out how to install auto civ.  Now there's 28, and auto civ is broken again, and I can't see basic statistics displayed while I play.  Very basic stuff like # of laborers.  I'm playing blind.

I can't be the only one with this issue.  I'm curious how others handle it.

You raise a valid point. In the specific case of autociv you can look at the autociv thread where I make bits of updates. 

I guess very detailed change logs warning mod Devs about expiring function names would be better.

If there is a breaking change, just introduce a new function alongside the old one to ensure support 

[Stan`]

Everything is supposed to be on there https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/wiki/PortA27ToR28 but it's not always respected; (The new one for R29 is empty)

We cannot always keep the old functions;

 

[Mentula]

Since mods are maintained by "private" users, who are not necessarily into the details of 0 A.D. development, any missing update to mods (or faulty code, or unclear installation instructions, or whatever can be related to mods) is solely a modder's responsibility. In this sense, I don't think this is something 0 A.D. (as a project) is lacking.

I know it can be frustrating not to have our favourite mod promptly installed the same day a new 0 A.D. version is released, but as a user... just be patient, updates will come.

I find that 0 A.D. devs are doing a good job to signal the changes that may impact mods from one version to another. Maybe modders (I totally include myself here) should be more alert to release dates. And of course, be clear on installation instructions, care about cross-compatibility with other mods, and other stuff that sometimes is done without precise or established guidelines.