Suggestions for 0 A.D.

[Obelix]

Hotkey for the selection of units by rank

I read @Gurken Khan was happy with the solution to use autociv-mod for having a hotkey to select units by rank (see the thread linked below). As I found no corresponding ticket or discussion, I suggest implementing this feature in 0 A.D. main game. Maybe there are more supporters for this suggestion around to establish a proper thread.

In the next step, there could be four buttons implemented for selecting each unit by rank 1, 2, 3 or selecting all (in other words: deselecting by rank). I have an unsued area of the gui between the mini map, the formation and the selection area in mind (see the annotated screenshot attached).

 

[Philip the Swaggerless]

Boats:

Request: Boats should be made more intuitive to use with visual or sound indicators.

Problem 1: Sometimes you think you should be able to go somewhere in a boat but you can't because:

1. The passage is too narrow
2. The water is too shallow (I think).

It should be clear to the player where they can go.

Ideas for solutions:

1. Make the water incrementally lighter the shallower it is.
2. Play a sound effect if you click to travel on an area a boat can't actually go on.
3. Play a sound effect if the boat takes a path significantly longer than the straight-line distance to the destination.  (So you know right away if its gonna take the long way.)

Problem 2:  Sometimes you think you should be able to garrison/ungarrison or repair a boat but you can't.

Ideas for solution:

1. Have a docking mechanism with a visual or sound indicating that the boat is now docked, so it can be repaired, garrisoned, or ungarrisoned.
   1. The dock-able positions should be defined and intuitive.  Players should be able to recognize them.  For example, beaches.  (I think that is already how it is basically.)
   2. If you attempt to dock but cannot, there should be a sound indicating the location is un-dockable.
   3. Attempts to garrison a docked boat should never fail if the unit is coming from an appropriate level.  (For example, if the boat is docked on a beach, units on an adjacent cliff cannot board.
   4. This also means that when you click to have a unit garrison a boat, the boat should not automatically start moving towards the person.  So that would have to be changed from the current boat behavior.

[Gurken Khan]

2 hours ago, Philip the Swaggerless said:

Problem 1: Sometimes you think you should be able to go somewhere in a boat but you can't because:

1. The passage is too narrow
2. The water is too shallow (I think).

I hate it. Also I think we have different fords: those where boats can travel through and the others; I can't tell them apart visually, I have to know the map.

[strat0spheric]

Hello !

I am posting this for Chesnutter, cause he asked me to I think these are great and probably ambitious ideas for improvement of the game.... (i hope this is the right place for it .. if not please move it)

 

Hey,

I’m a Roman history fan so my knowledge and focus is on them more than other ancient civs. I think these would make playing as and against the Romans more authentic, fun and challenging.

Bear in mind I have no coding experience but here are my ideas.

So, Roman engineer (unit) builds trenches, traps and roads. OR it could be just the basic infantry unit. Historically, Roman soldiers were part fighter and part builder. I think a greater emphasis in 0ad of this would make it more real.

1. Trenches (with spiky stakes or simply a deep empty moat (with/without water):

- Doesn’t prevent enemy infantry movement across but slows them down a lot (80% speed reduction)

- Doesn’t damage infantry unless spikes/stakes tech upgrade (like a gate in a wooden wall however you could double click to select all trenches in view to upgrade them to have stakes all at the same time

- Requires a lot of wood.

- Cheap and fast to build compared to walls but in some ways less effective. Available in phase one, degrades over time(?). Built like a wall across an area. Good against early cav rushes. Prevents cav and siege from crossing. 

2. Traps/pits « lilies »:

- heavily damages and slows down enemy infantry and cav, but doesn’t damage rams.

- Expensive to build.

- Built along an area (shown as a bunch of small holes with spikes in them)

- Barely visible for a realistic element of surprise. Maybe once enemy units have been damaged they become viable to the enemy (like trenches degrades over time). Would this be hard to code?

3. Roads - speed up movement of units (allied AND enemy).

- Available in phase one though maybe cost prohibitive unless teammates contribute resources - which I think would be cool, increasing teamwork and community interaction (which is what I like about gaming). 

- Built out on the terrain and any units moving on it move 20-25-30% faster.

- Requires wood and a lot of stone.

- Built mostly straight to make it user-friendly (curved or zigzag roads wouldn’t be playable).

- Shift right click to make the units go from point A to point B (so they walk along the road).

- Or it could work a bit like a hero/monk where when they are near the road they move faster (but less visually appealing IMO). Does this make sense from a user POV?

- Roads could be built through forests, bogs, hills, rivers etc... just like the Romans did it.

I don't think roads would make the romans OP because the cost would be fronted by the user building it but it could also be used against him.

*Roads are one of the things that made it possible for Rome to conquer the known world (and for them to be conquered themselves by « barbarians” in the 200-400s AD), so I specifically like this idea.

4. (Non-Roman) Need to be stronger against Siege. Wooden walls should be cheaper to build and faster. To make possible what Caeser did in his Gallic wars. Ie Alesia.
 

OTHER GENERAL IDEAS to increase historical accuracy and more interesting game play.

• Range bonus for troops/siege on hills.
• Attack + defense/health bonus for troops hills.
• More implementation for defensive formations (like Romans) but that players actually want to use.
• Slow attrition for armies not in allied/home territory. Attrition for armies/troops in the sun VS healing rate for troops in the shade/forests.
• Defensive bonus for troops fighting on edge of forest (to imitate guerrilla tactics).
• 0zon “Cost surface” ideas + some input from me.

“With a cost surface function recalculating range or walking speed etc. based on attributes such as slope, altitude or landuse type (forest, meadow etc.) some of the ideas could be maybe technically implemented..…” - 0zon

 

• Reduced speed walking up hills.
• Reduced speed walking through forests/bogs/sandy areas.
• Increased speed for troops on flat/non hilly ground (specifically for cav).
• Rams can only move on flat open terrain.
• Increased fertility/food gains on flat grassy areas (for farms).
• Increased building costs on non-flat lands.

 

• Forests that regrow.
• Rams get attack bonus when garrisoned.
• Allied temple’s aura also heals troops.

An idea from LeiftheLucky (I think)

• Ranged units have only a certain amount of ammo and then they have to use melee or/and go back to allied territory/cc/barracks/garrison to replenish stock.

 

Keep up the good work and THANK YOU!

Chesnutter on 0ad

Edited several times for spelling and formatting

 

Edited February 5 by strat0spheric

[Grautvornix]

Thanks for the good ideas!

I don't know what we should do with all the great ideas - ideally we should create a repository for ideas for future discussion. These may currently look complex to implement but possibly at a later time they may become feasible.

Anyway the game being only in its 20s; I am sure there is still a lot of potential   

Here is another collection and discussion hidden inside the forum:

 

... Says somebody who never contributed any thing to the code.

[Grautvornix]

(shame on me but I am not really able to do so)

 

[zozio32]

I can see that the idea of being able to build roads that would give a speed bonus through an aura is shared between many people...   :-)      the speed of units per default can also be reduced a bit not to have to fast mouvement on the roads.

I would put the speed bonus as a fixed value, not a %,  so it would have proportionally a bigger impact for slow moving unit.

Finally, I have no idea how the path finder works, but it would be great if it was configured to find the quickest way, not the shortest.   In that case, the speed aura of the road could potentially be taken into account.

Now, all the civ could have the possibility to lay down track. Only the roman could lay down roads, with higher stone cost but higher benefit.

[Grautvornix]

I guess the issue is to define buildings that can be walked on.

What if we "re-use" the mechanism (not the art) of fields? They can be built and be walked on and they might have an aura. Unfortunately they can be destroyed as well.

Could that work?

[zozio32]

1 hour ago, Grautvornix said:

I guess the issue is to define buildings that can be walked on.

What if we "re-use" the mechanism (not the art) of fields? They can be built and be walked on and they might have an aura. Unfortunately they can be destroyed as well.

Could that work?

from my point of view, that should work indeed.   We can put quite a high life value. Question is, can they be "neutrale" , in the sense that they should benefit any unit, and should not be attacked by default?

in terme of artwork, we already have paved road around the civic centre, and tracks, so that should be ok no?

[blarp123]

I think a great feature for the release would be the ability to custom maps in the user mod folder with other players inside the game lobby so that you don’t have to try and find some other way to share them. It would be a lot easier to play custom maps with friends that way. 

Edited February 9 by blarp123

[blarp123]

On 5/2/2025 at 11:13 AM, strat0spheric said:

Hello !

I am posting this for Chesnutter, cause he asked me to I think these are great and probably ambitious ideas for improvement of the game.... (i hope this is the right place for it .. if not please move it)

 

Hey,

I’m a Roman history fan so my knowledge and focus is on them more than other ancient civs. I think these would make playing as and against the Romans more authentic, fun and challenging.

Bear in mind I have no coding experience but here are my ideas.

So, Roman engineer (unit) builds trenches, traps and roads. OR it could be just the basic infantry unit. Historically, Roman soldiers were part fighter and part builder. I think a greater emphasis in 0ad of this would make it more real.

1. Trenches (with spiky stakes or simply a deep empty moat (with/without water):

- Doesn’t prevent enemy infantry movement across but slows them down a lot (80% speed reduction)

- Doesn’t damage infantry unless spikes/stakes tech upgrade (like a gate in a wooden wall however you could double click to select all trenches in view to upgrade them to have stakes all at the same time

- Requires a lot of wood.

- Cheap and fast to build compared to walls but in some ways less effective. Available in phase one, degrades over time(?). Built like a wall across an area. Good against early cav rushes. Prevents cav and siege from crossing. 

2. Traps/pits « lilies »:

- heavily damages and slows down enemy infantry and cav, but doesn’t damage rams.

- Expensive to build.

- Built along an area (shown as a bunch of small holes with spikes in them)

- Barely visible for a realistic element of surprise. Maybe once enemy units have been damaged they become viable to the enemy (like trenches degrades over time). Would this be hard to code?

3. Roads - speed up movement of units (allied AND enemy).

- Available in phase one though maybe cost prohibitive unless teammates contribute resources - which I think would be cool, increasing teamwork and community interaction (which is what I like about gaming). 

- Built out on the terrain and any units moving on it move 20-25-30% faster.

- Requires wood and a lot of stone.

- Built mostly straight to make it user-friendly (curved or zigzag roads wouldn’t be playable).

- Shift right click to make the units go from point A to point B (so they walk along the road).

- Or it could work a bit like a hero/monk where when they are near the road they move faster (but less visually appealing IMO). Does this make sense from a user POV?

- Roads could be built through forests, bogs, hills, rivers etc... just like the Romans did it.

I don't think roads would make the romans OP because the cost would be fronted by the user building it but it could also be used against him.

*Roads are one of the things that made it possible for Rome to conquer the known world (and for them to be conquered themselves by « barbarians” in the 200-400s AD), so I specifically like this idea.

4. (Non-Roman) Need to be stronger against Siege. Wooden walls should be cheaper to build and faster. To make possible what Caeser did in his Gallic wars. Ie Alesia.
 

OTHER GENERAL IDEAS to increase historical accuracy and more interesting game play.

• Range bonus for troops/siege on hills.
• Attack + defense/health bonus for troops hills.
• More implementation for defensive formations (like Romans) but that players actually want to use.
• Slow attrition for armies not in allied/home territory. Attrition for armies/troops in the sun VS healing rate for troops in the shade/forests.
• Defensive bonus for troops fighting on edge of forest (to imitate guerrilla tactics).
• 0zon “Cost surface” ideas + some input from me.

“With a cost surface function recalculating range or walking speed etc. based on attributes such as slope, altitude or landuse type (forest, meadow etc.) some of the ideas could be maybe technically implemented..…” - 0zon

 

• Reduced speed walking up hills.
• Reduced speed walking through forests/bogs/sandy areas.
• Increased speed for troops on flat/non hilly ground (specifically for cav).
• Rams can only move on flat open terrain.
• Increased fertility/food gains on flat grassy areas (for farms).
• Increased building costs on non-flat lands.

 

• Forests that regrow.
• Rams get attack bonus when garrisoned.
• Allied temple’s aura also heals troops.

An idea from LeiftheLucky (I think)

• Ranged units have only a certain amount of ammo and then they have to use melee or/and go back to allied territory/cc/barracks/garrison to replenish stock.

 

Keep up the good work and THANK YOU!

Chesnutter on 0ad

Edited several times for spelling and formatting

 

Great ideas! I think the ideas around terrain elevation and type effecting attack range and movement speed should definitely be in 0ad because they would add a lot of strategy. I disagree with making rams require flatter terrain, even though it is realistic, because it is already quite annoying to get them to move sometimes. Maybe there could be an upgrade for stronger ram operators that gives you the current state of ram movement ( or better ), otherwise you get the flat ground requirements? Also maybe rams can destroy trees? I have a lot of trouble with rams stuck in forests. You wouldn’t get the wood, it would just knock the trees over.

Edited February 9 by blarp123