Suggestions for 0 A.D.

[Genava55]

6 hours ago, Sundiata said:

This is one the things that lies at the crux of the matter. There are more than a million total downloads of 0AD and recent alpha releases are hitting hundred thousand+ downloads if I'm not mistaken... At any given time there are not more 200 people in the multiplayer lobby (if that), and I'd be surprised if more than a few thousand people play 0AD online. That means that the vast majority of players are playing Single Player against the AI... This is an important fact to keep in mind when thinking about 0AD's player base. Online players are simply way more vocal, by definition, because they're online more often, they're more active in development, on the forum and other platforms pertaining to 0AD. There is a large, silent majority, that enjoys a totally different way of playing and experiencing the game than the hectic, fast-paced (sometimes stressful) MP-games. A lot of people play games to relax (one of the reasons why the passive AI was so important) and enjoy the details. The MP dudes don't even use the zoom function... Camera is always the same angle... Laugh at the sight of players building an esthetic and organic looking town... Play at low graphic settings because frames per second are more important... Don't see anything wrong with "house-walls" or building more barracks than they have houses. Of course I'm generalizing here, and I enjoy a good MP-game myself, but MP and SP are two different worlds, and MP-concerns have gone at the expensive of the SP-experience. Many people want more variety than can be had from obsessive compulsive 30 minute clicking competitions. Normally, MP-player is a derivative from SP, but with 0AD, it's become the other way around, and that's problematic for a number of reasons, especially with regards to fleshing out the gameplay. There's also a lack of interconnectedness between the different game-mechanics, but again, Delenda Est is going a long way at creating a more harmonious and integrated whole (but that's a different discussion). 

This one made me laugh.

[Genava55]

On 8/2/2018 at 1:06 PM, Sundiata said:

The 4 resources thing is mostly an archaic holdover from a time when computers (and games) were a lot simpler. People today are used to playing a lot more complicated strategy games with crazy amounts of options and possibilities. I understand that 0AD isn't a city-builder, a management game or a battle simulator, and shouldn't try to be so either, BUT, that doesn't mean that we should be hesitant to think outside the box, and borrow those elements from comparable genres that might add significant value to 0AD's gameplay without betraying the original game-design, which is actually far more in-depth than the game currently is and explicitly states that 0AD shouldn't become a clicking competition, but have varied ways to attain victory. 

You should like reading this blog:

https://waywardstrategist.com/2016/11/17/what-rts-can-learn/

https://waywardstrategist.com/2015/11/23/rts-design-thought-control-of-economic-processes/

https://waywardstrategist.com/2015/10/02/why-rts-the-challenge-fun-and-benefits-of-playing-rts-games/

[astheroth]

On 8/3/2018 at 3:53 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

More powerful in what way? Be specific.

 

Lesser or non existent lag when you play with numerous units for example. 

[Apostar Dinero]

Hi, I like your game. But I have some suggestions.
1: the language of the Iberians is incorrect. The Basque language is not an Iberian language (in the sense of a language of the Iberian peoples). I understand that you have put it because the Iberian language does not know how to translate, but it would be better not to put any Spanish language to the Iberians so as not to make historical mistakes like this one.
2: The melee units when attacking the buildings could be do as if they were throwing torches to make it more realistic.
3: I guess you already know this, but a military tutorial to explain the things that are missing in the economic tutorial, such as borders, etc ...
4: Going back to the Iberians, I would change the design of the ibera priestess to a more historical design. We do not know anything about this, it's true, but you could approach a more realistic design by simply taking Iberian elements. You can look the Lady of Elche, it is true that we do not know exactly what it is. Most historians believe that attire corresponds to the clothes of an aristocratic woman by other excavations where that attire is documented. Others think that it is a kind of priestesses. And the least defended hypothesis is that of divinity. But you can put it as a priestess or draw on it to create a new design more realistic than the current one.
5: The texts some have historical errors or exaggerations, very understandable thing (you are not historian). What I would like there to be information on each unit later, at least to know its functions better.
6: A clearer panel of the characteristics of the military units, that is to say, that you do not have to put the course of the mouse on the shield  with the sword to see it. But the latter does not matter.

7:Pericles was an Athenian politician, but he was not a military man. So I would replace it by another Greek that were military.
This is not important, since it is historically good. But I would have put Vercingetorix with a Celtic chain mail and a helmet( protec the head is very important). It is good that you have put on a Greek armor, since it could have been obtained by foreign merchants or by steal it from a Roman. It's a matter of taste.

I'm sorry for my English, I'm not very good with languages. I wrote one that is specializing in military issues and is in the last year of the History career. One thing seems to me one of the best documented games I've seen, my congratulations, although you have to polish it. If you need help, you can count on me.

Friendly greeting.

[Apostar Dinero]

If I see other errors, I will inform you. Always from a construtive criticism.

[Stan`]

1 hour ago, Apostar Dinero said:

: the language of the Iberians is incorrect. The Basque language is not an Iberian language (in the sense of a language of the Iberian peoples). I understand that you have put it because the Iberian language does not know how to translate, but it would be better not to put any Spanish language to the Iberians so as not to make historical mistakes like this one.

It's mainly because we don't have any historical source yet for whatever Celtic language they spoke. If you have correct translations please share.

1 hour ago, Apostar Dinero said:

The melee units when attacking the buildings could be do as if they were throwing torches to make it more realistic.

There is work in that area. Multiple attacks for units etc #2577 and #252

1 hour ago, Apostar Dinero said:

7:Pericles was an Athenian politician, but he was not a military man. So I would replace it by another Greek that were military.

Not true. He did go to war.

1 hour ago, Apostar Dinero said:

The texts some have historical errors or exaggerations, very understandable thing (you are not historian). What I would like there to be information on each unit later, at least to know its functions better

Source or it didn't happen.

1 hour ago, Apostar Dinero said:

Going back to the Iberians, I would change the design of the ibera priestess to a more historical design. We do not know anything about this, it's true, but you could approach a more realistic design by simply taking Iberian elements. You can look the Lady of Elche, it is true that we do not know exactly what it is. Most historians believe that attire corresponds to the clothes of an aristocratic woman by other excavations where that attire is documented. Others think that it is a kind of priestesses. And the least defended hypothesis is that of divinity. But you can put it as a priestess or draw on it to create a new design more realistic than the current one.

If we don't know and there is no historical backup. It will stay as is. The person who did the research  was thorough and one of the founders of 0AD so I'd like to see those claims backupped if you don't mind.

[Guest]

Indeed Pericles’ wikipedia page suggests otherwise as Stan mentioned.

(I have a modification which allows units to throw torches (balls of fire actually), but it looks pretty wierd and silly without animations)

Edited September 16, 2018 by Guest

[dmzerocold]

2 hours ago, Apostar Dinero said:

2: The melee units when attacking the buildings could be do as if they were throwing torches to make it more realistic.

Regarding torches, it also depends on what kind of building you wanna throw it ... Stone wall? stone tower? it shouldn't work , but agree to destroy something with wood and grass is a good idea

Also maybe we can add it as an upgrade for troops

1- to use torche for flammable buildings 

2- few soldiers toghether build up ram , just to destroy small buildins , this one also should not be possible for big towers or walls , but acceptable for small size buildings .. not a fortress  

[Genava55]

Maybe something with sapping and tunnel warfare:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_warfare#Ancient_Greece

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sape

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/history/6-great-military-mines.html

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/ancient-history/3-uses-mining-roman-sieges.html

Julius Caesar, de bello gallico, book 2, 6: "The Gallic mode of besieging is the same as that of the Belgae: when after having drawn a large number of men around the whole of the fortifications, stones have begun to be cast against the wall on all sides, and the wall has been stripped of its defenders, [then], forming a testudo, they advance to the gates and undermine the wall: which was easily effected on this occasion; for while so large a number were casting stones and darts, no one was able to maintain his position upon the wall."

Edited September 16, 2018 by Genava55

[Apostar Dinero]

First of all, thanks for answering quickly, that gives me confidence about the project. I will answer in order, and thank you very much for your comments:
 Language: precisely because there are no translations, I said not to put it in any specific language. Although it may look bad compared to other civilizations that if it have language.
 Torches: I'm happy you're working. And he's right, it would be ridiculous to throw a torch at a stone fortress.
 Pericles: It's true that he went to war, but I've always considered him a politician, maybe because of classic historiography.
Source: what I was referring to were not concrete facts, it is also true that being in the career of history have made us distrust of the source and the historiography. Example: it's an exaggeration that you talk about Toledo steel. The Iberians were known to be great craftsmen with metal, but there is no relationship with Toledo steel. The Toledo steel is so good because it is the mixture of Christian techniques with Muslim (DUEÑAS BERAIZ, Germán). Of course, there is a relationship that is the good quality of metal in the Iberian Peninsula(German Dueñas Beraiz and Fernando Quesada Sanz), but the technique was fundamental.

Priestess: I will pass the documentation that talks about these hypotheses and about the Iberian religion, although very little is known. I will have to go back to look for it because the read to prepare the asginatura of archeology of Spain. The documentation I will give will be in Spanish, I hope it is not an inconvenience.

I hope no one has been offended, I have said everything with good intentions.

 

[Stan`]

On 9/16/2018 at 7:33 PM, Apostar Dinero said:

Language: precisely because there are no translations, I said not to put it in any specific language. Although it may look bad compared to other civilizations that if it have language.

I'd rather leave them as is. My point is that Basque is a language that hasn't evolved and that has no common roots with any other language and probably hasn't changed much for 2000 years it's a good choice even though it doesn't represent the whole celtiberian civilization it still represents a small part which is better than nothing IMHO. I totally understand your point though.

On 9/16/2018 at 7:33 PM, Apostar Dinero said:

Source: what I was referring to were not concrete facts, it is also true that being in the career of history have made us distrust of the source and the historiography. Example: it's an exaggeration that you talk about Toledo steel. The Iberians were known to be great craftsmen with metal, but there is no relationship with Toledo steel. The Toledo steel is so good because it is the mixture of Christian techniques with Muslim (DUEÑAS BERAIZ, Germán). Of course, there is a relationship that is the good quality of metal in the Iberian Peninsula(German Dueñas Beraiz and Fernando Quesada Sanz), but the technique was fundamental.

Sure feel free to give a better name for that technology. Maybe @wowgetoffyourcellphone will have some ideas too.

On 9/16/2018 at 7:33 PM, Apostar Dinero said:

Priestess: I will pass the documentation that talks about these hypotheses and about the Iberian religion, although very little is known. I will have to go back to look for it because the read to prepare the asginatura of archeology of Spain. The documentation I will give will be in Spanish, I hope it is not an inconvenience.

If there is a reasonable doubt we will see.

Sorry for the long reply time I forgot.

[Genava55]

As I said in a previous thread, there is a hypothesis that Basque and Iberian languages are related. Basque has known some evolution to unify the dialects in one language. But the structure of the language and the etymological roots are definitely pre-indo-european. I think it is an acceptable compromise for the game to use it for the Iberians. And anyway, the Celtiberians had a different culture with a different language. 

[Jaxxkxx]

Formations in 0 AD are amazing, however i have two suggestions that aren't far fetched and would greatly improve the game.

1. Units in different formations cannot move in separate formations.

If I want to have my cavalry form a wedge, and my infantry form a phalanx, that's fine. But the problem occurs when i want to move them both in their formations. If i try to move them, they either just assume the no formation position, or they mix into a formation that includes both units (eg: closed order, forced march, etc) I should be able to have my infantry in a different formation than my cavalry, and move them both at the same time

2. Line formation

One of the common formations used by the Romans, Macedonians, and other civilizations during that time period, was the line formation, this formation was just a long horizontal line of soldier, meant to intimidate and/or circle and entrap the enemy. This is currently not a formation in the game, but it would be great if it could be. I realize that any size-able army's line would be much to long to have any use, so each line of units is 50 units long, this is still very long and enough to circle and trap an enemy, while not completely hindering the use of this formation. if all 50 spots are filled in the first line, it makes a second line, and so on.

I really think that these mechanics would greatly improve the game and would love for them to be implemented.

[OptimusShepard]

1 hour ago, Jaxxkxx said:

2. Line formation

One of the common formations used by the Romans, Macedonians, and other civilizations during that time period, was the line formation, this formation was just a long horizontal line of soldier, meant to intimidate and/or circle and entrap the enemy. This is currently not a formation in the game, but it would be great if it could be. I realize that any size-able army's line would be much to long to have any use, so each line of units is 50 units long, this is still very long and enough to circle and trap an enemy, while not completely hindering the use of this formation. if all 50 spots are filled in the first line, it makes a second line, and so on.

I really think that these mechanics would greatly improve the game and would love for them to be implemented.

You could use the hotkey "freehand position".

Right Drag: With units selected: when the mouse is released, the units will spread out on your drawn line. Same modification options like normal move command.

[Jaxxkxx]

1 hour ago, OptimusShepard said:

You could use the hotkey "freehand position".

Right Drag: With units selected: when the mouse is released, the units will spread out on your drawn line. Same modification options like normal move command.

Thanks, but that's more of a side suggestion, very helpful advice though!

[Genava55]

A good match with multiple strategies in the late game:

 

[Genava55]

On 9/16/2018 at 6:49 PM, Genava55 said:

Maybe something with sapping and tunnel warfare:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_warfare#Ancient_Greece

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sape

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/history/6-great-military-mines.html

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/ancient-history/3-uses-mining-roman-sieges.html

Julius Caesar, de bello gallico, book 2, 6: "The Gallic mode of besieging is the same as that of the Belgae: when after having drawn a large number of men around the whole of the fortifications, stones have begun to be cast against the wall on all sides, and the wall has been stripped of its defenders, [then], forming a testudo, they advance to the gates and undermine the wall: which was easily effected on this occasion; for while so large a number were casting stones and darts, no one was able to maintain his position upon the wall."

https://www.fpri.org/article/2015/04/fighting-under-the-earth-the-history-of-tunneling-in-warfare/

[Imperator Ferrum Princeps I]

Visiblegaarrison for archers on top of ships instead of just adding extra arrows, would make for more interesting marine warfare.

[Genava55]

On 10/10/2018 at 3:03 PM, Genava55 said:

 

Spoiler

https://www.fpri.org/article/2015/04/fighting-under-the-earth-the-history-of-tunneling-in-warfare/

 

Why not using heroes or even officers (like Delenda Est) to give the ability to set up a "tunnel" against a building? It could be something with a loading bar before to start or/and something you need to "build" with your men.

As officer it could be a Primus Pilus centurion or a Tribunus Militum for the Romans, a Syntagmatarch for the Hellenes, a Corionos for the Celts etc.

[Imperator Ferrum Princeps I]

2 hours ago, Genava55 said:

Why not using heroes or even officers (like Delenda Est) to give the ability to set up a "tunnel" against a building? It could be something with a loading bar before to start or/and something you need to "build" with your men.

As officer it could be a Primus Pilus centurion or a Tribunus Militum for the Romans, a Syntagmatarch for the Hellenes, a Corionos for the Celts etc.

Yeah, it would be nice to have minor hero officers, would also be cool if killing heroes/officers gave you a classic "the enemy general is dead" notification, as rn hard to tell when you killed an enemy hero.

[Guest]

14 hours ago, Imperator Ferrum Princeps I said:

Yeah, it would be nice to have minor hero officers, would also be cool if killing heroes/officers gave you a classic "the enemy general is dead" notification, as rn hard to tell when you killed an enemy hero.

If any mod out there wants to use this feature.

Spoiler

Index: binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Damage.js
===================================================================
--- binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Damage.js	(revision 21899)
+++ binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Damage.js	(working copy)
@@ -288,6 +288,18 @@
 	let cmpAttackerOwnership = Engine.QueryInterface(attacker, IID_Ownership);
 	let atkOwner = cmpAttackerOwnership && cmpAttackerOwnership.GetOwner() != INVALID_PLAYER ? cmpAttackerOwnership.GetOwner() : attackerOwner;
 
+	let cmpIdentity = Engine.QueryInterface(target, IID_Identity);
+	if (cmpIdentity.HasClass("Hero"))
+	{
+		// can make a new notification too I suppose.
+		Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_GuiInterface).AddTimeNotification({
+			"message": markForTranslation("Well, your hero is dead.."),
+			"players": [atkOwner],
+			"translateMessage": true
+		});
+		//PlaySound("attacked", target); if you want some dramatic sound.
+	}
+
 	// Add to killer statistics.
 	let cmpKillerPlayerStatisticsTracker = QueryPlayerIDInterface(atkOwner, IID_StatisticsTracker);
 	if (cmpKillerPlayerStatisticsTracker)

 

 

[Stan`]

1 hour ago, (-_-) said:

If any mod out there wants to use this feature.

  Hide contents

Index: binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Damage.js
===================================================================
--- binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Damage.js	(revision 21899)
+++ binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Damage.js	(working copy)
@@ -288,6 +288,18 @@
 	let cmpAttackerOwnership = Engine.QueryInterface(attacker, IID_Ownership);
 	let atkOwner = cmpAttackerOwnership && cmpAttackerOwnership.GetOwner() != INVALID_PLAYER ? cmpAttackerOwnership.GetOwner() : attackerOwner;
 
+	let cmpIdentity = Engine.QueryInterface(target, IID_Identity);
+	if (cmpIdentity.HasClass("Hero"))
+	{
+		// can make a new notification too I suppose.
+		Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_GuiInterface).AddTimeNotification({
+			"message": markForTranslation("Well, your hero is dead.."),
+			"players": [atkOwner],
+			"translateMessage": true
+		});
+		//PlaySound("attacked", target); if you want some dramatic sound.
+	}
+
 	// Add to killer statistics.
 	let cmpKillerPlayerStatisticsTracker = QueryPlayerIDInterface(atkOwner, IID_StatisticsTracker);
 	if (cmpKillerPlayerStatisticsTracker)

 

 

Looks like something that could be polished made an option and submitted to Phabricator don't you think ?

[Guest]

I guess it would be a nice addition. But I have no idea how to display this information (notification style wise).

[Stan`]

Dunno the same way Phase Up notification are sent ?

[thankforpie]

oh i didnt notice this thread, i have balancing some suggestions

1. OP CIV META

my sugestion would be nerfing gauls, britons and ptolemies - that will let players for more competetive play (and more fair play), players in multiplayer wont be forced to play these 3 civilizations if they want to win.

there are lot of civs that i like but the urge to pick OP civ is ultra big. above mentioned civilisations are too fast

I played many competetive games MOBA included and it is unavoidable to not have stronger and weaker civs/characters/champions but the gap between these 3 and rest is so big that most players started 'maining' celtics and ptolemies, to the point where at least half of each game on multiplayer are celtics and ptolemies (sometimes all players)

 

if these 3 civs were growing at same pace that other civilisations do, it would be great

 

2. RANGED UNIT META

Althrough point 2. and 3. arent as troublesome as point 1, I noticed ranged units are much stronger overall than melee units.

maybe with small dmg nerf people would start using melee units for something else than for human shields supposed to die instead of ranged units lol

 

3. SLINGER > ARCHER,JAVELIN

one could think if archers have biggest range then they are strongest,  or vice versa - javelins, because they have biggest dmg.

thats not the case. slingers can kill javelins before they come close.

 

Javelins have bigger dmg than slingers, but it doesnt do anything because slingers already have enough dmg to kill. why would you need more?

ranged units are often hitting same target, so if u have 60 ranged units together, theres HUGE chance they will atk same targets, and only 5 attacks would be enough to kill, but since it was the closest target, theres often situation where 60 of ranged units hit exactly same person instead of splitting their arrows for targets, therefore a lot of arrows are wasted.

thats case in fights javelin vs slinger (not with archers, they have low dmg),  javelin just die before they come close, and when they are close they also atk slower so the 'bigger dps' isnt really bigger, its much smaller

 

slingers somehow have perfect atk range and atk speed, so the supposedly bigger javelins damage isnt helping them at all, because they are slower and need to come closer, and they will die before that happens

 

 

 

 

my few thoughts

Edited January 2, 2019 by thankforpie