Really?

[sphyrth]

Only the copyright issues can be a big weakness.

I've seen the critics expressing their disagreements for abandoning the Total War engine. But a fraction of them held faith that the game would still be good, and with the release... they agree that the pros have outweighed the cons.

Hyrule Conquest is a mod that really sticks out like a sore thumb... so much so that it sadly overshadows Pyrogenesis itself.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Yes, its pretty solid.

[av93]

1 hour ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Yeah remember that document.

That can cause misunderstandings, please try to avoid this kind of post

[Lion.Kanzen]

8 minutes ago, av93 said:

That can cause misunderstandings, please try to avoid this kind of post

You understanding very well. LoL.

Edited October 9, 2017 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

I'm Not gonna be hypocritical with that guy. He is rude, but may be the image is hard for some soft eyes.

 

He is in this way unpolite, so I'm the same way. But they have some interesting ideas. And creates the design very professional.

 

Edited October 9, 2017 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 hour ago, sphyrth said:

Only the copyright issues can be a big weakness.

I've seen the critics expressing their disagreements for abandoning the Total War engine. But a fraction of them held faith that the game would still be good, and with the release... they agree that the pros have outweighed the cons.

Hyrule Conquest is a mod that really sticks out like a sore thumb... so much so that it sadly overshadows Pyrogenesis itself.

They don't see whole picture, don't have vision. Only are attracted to Total war name. Like just fans.

[shieldwolf23]

@elexis, @Grugnas - sorry if there is a misunderstanding of what I posted earlier. What I was saying was only a reply on @Sundiata's vision. What I said, if you can re-read, is that THAT is the FUTURE. That vision is not important - it may in all probability not happen; meeting with each other is I believe more important as of this stage.

I proposed a meeting of like-minded individuals, modders and the core team alike, to discuss what the game would rather look as of the present. Mods have given us glimpses, the community has given suggestions both outrageous and not. I was hoping for you guys to maybe consider talking to each other and having a discussion, with the end result of a clear game design to be followed by all.

Sorry if by trying to propose that same thing, you'd rather push me to create my own mod. That is not my intention, and I am far from qualified to make something technical. I guess back to being a lurker then, me useless inconsiderate, good for nothing wolf.

Edited October 9, 2017 by shieldwolf23

[Lion.Kanzen]

@shieldwolf23 that's the spirit.

[Sundiata]

@elexis Shieldwolf23's and my own ideas are just that. Possible ideas/visions for the future of 0AD. Neither of us expect them to be implemented. That's not how it was supposed to come over at least. They were just examples. I won't argue the content of your reply, but I'm sure you knew shieldwolf knows that 0AD is open-source and he can create his own game if he likes. Neither of us are coding-wizards like you, and I'm sure you know that as well.

23 minutes ago, shieldwolf23 said:

Sorry if by trying to propose that same thing, you'd rather push me to create my own mod. That is not my intention, and I am far from qualified to make something technical. I guess back to being a lurker then, me useless inconsiderate, good for nothing wolf.

This comment makes me sad, and is exactly the type of comment you don't want to see from your fans/player base. 

 

@WhiteTreePaladin About the lower quality maps thing, I also think it's an issue. They don't all need to be removed. The ones that can be updated should be updated using the best maps as a benchmark. I also think those totally unrealistic/unnatural looking maps should preferably be moved to a "fantasy map" section in my opinion.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Why no join forces?

But without these sense of superiority or pride that some people have.

We did before  Council of modders.

[shieldwolf23]

@Lion.Kanzen - Amen brother. 

@Sundiata -  It's not that hard for me to do - being a lurker again - since I was that even before the Indiegogo campaign. I love the vision of 0 AD - thus, that donator badge right there. I was only hoping 0 AD's leadership would be more open to "joining forces" like Lion said.

[DarcReaver]

8 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

This the help of @DarcReaver.

The sad part is no one of these lines are a code.

I certainly won't waste dozens of hours to create another base game mod that noone plays. It was meant to actually make the dev team think of their concept, and how they're doing the exact opposite of the design document of 0 AD. And this hasn't changed in half a year. Again. I said I would start working more in practise if I become staff. But since it didn't happen I didn't contribute either. Unfortunately - but I have other projects that are more beneficial to spend my time on. 

I said that I offer to make a proper concept myself as a part of the core team OR someone else needs to do it. From what I've seen there are a couple of ideas going on, but apart from that nothing significantly happened. So it's neither me doing it nor someone else, leading the game's progress ad absurdum once again for half a year. You can't tell me that someone would not have been able to make a gameplay concept in such a long time. Even if not working on it full time. 

 

21 hours ago, Sundiata said:

 

Fair enough, but if 10 or so unofficial mods can be supported, why not 2 official ones, instead of only one? Also, the casual player mode would essentially be the expanded version of the competitive mode, so it would be logical/intuitive which features would be in what version. I also don't see any reason why both modes couldn't be played both offline and online. One is just more tailored for competitive play and the other for expanded gameplay. 

I ask you something: Why do ppl play singleplayer? Usually to either be entertained with an interesting story or somewhat "open world" style stuff that allows them to make the game the way they want.  At least that's what expect from single player games - either to be entertained like from a movie or with interesting new experiences, or to relax after a long day of work. 

0 AD has no interesting stories, and only a pretty limited "open world" character. At least unless people mod it for their personal needs (which again only a very small amount of people is willing to learn or to do). 

So, it's not even an option at this point, because there is no dedicated content that justifies a custom multiplayer/singleplayer split verison of 0 AD.

 

12 hours ago, balduin said:

Just to get one thing clear at the very beginning. 0 A.D. is a free and open source game. Which means it is all about choices. The choices you, I and all of us have. The list of choices starts with you can play 0 A.D. or you don't. This is what you can do with any game regardless if it is free or not. However, free and open source means you can participate and contribute to 0 A.D. There are many ways to contribute. But it also means if you are as unhappy as @DarcReaver then make a non-hostile fork. Find a new team and name for your project to work on your vision of the game.

However, people also have to realize that there is a difference between the game engine Pyrogensis and the visible game. Pyrogensis is the part of 0 A.D. which several developers actually contribute to. The engine is responsible for very basic things like rendering object, loading a unit definition from a file, the engine is responsible for calculating the path a unit will take the engine is also responsible to provide a mechanism to play online (multiplayer). This is the part most people are actually happy about.

 

I'm not unhappy. I'm just saying that the way things are done here are the opposite of how it should work and that the game cannot be completed or even be remotely successful as a game because it's missing almost every integral part that makes a game worth playing. It's just a playable tech demo with pretty graphics. Not a game. And it has not enough content for dedicated singleplayers, and not nearly enough gameplay depth in multiplayer. Which disqualifies it for both audiences. 

Quote

0 A.D. is basically a mod running on top of Pyrogenesis. However, people are downloading normally both when they download 0 A.D. What the online community really complains about is the balance changes to the 0 A.D., the mod running on top of Pyrogenesis. But they could create a mod which incorporates all there wishes, there is no need to have two versions of Pyrogenesis.

 

Regarding the other complains. Finding a common ground between some of the visions and ideas of people is impossible. But people can create mods, which incorporates there vision or there idea on how the game should be. 0 A.D. can be modified. For me it is okay to have many different balance mods. Then I can choose the one I like the most. However, sometimes I like one mod for several reasons and don't like other aspects of the same mod. Then again another mod focuses on different aspects. I love to have several mods. Mods which try new things or implement things differently. All mods have one thing in common, at the end of the day, I as a player have choices and this is important too me.

 

Yes, common ground is important. But it's more important to get a base that can be agreed about. This is absolutely necessary at some point. But this point has not even come yet. Also you like mods - well so do I. But guess what? Not everyone likes mods. And furthermore everything that is a mod is usually not put on the same level as the base game. I.E. competitive gaming always revolves around the basic game. Look at Hannibal_Barca - he plays 0 AD with competition in mind. He doesn't play DE mod or any other one, he plays the basic game. It's always like this.

If you buy a car you need to make sure which type of vehicle you want before you actually start discussing about rim sizes, tyres, color etc. What currently is happening is that you have a car without tyres and only a partly functional engine/transmission, and no interior except for seats. But at the same time you tell people "yeah you can choose your car's colour, lightbeams and interior by modding it, so go have fun with it! The car itself is great already".

 

This has not happened yet and is pretty urgent. If there would be at least a SOMEWHAT plan how the game should end up a lot of issues would fix themselves. 

Edited October 9, 2017 by DarcReaver

[elexis]

> I certainly won't waste dozens of hours to create another base game mod that noone plays.

Just directional damage by itself will cost many weeks if not months.

[DarcReaver]

33 minutes ago, elexis said:

> I certainly won't waste dozens of hours to create another base game mod that noone plays.

Just directional damage by itself will cost many weeks if not months.

 Like I stated - first comes the design decision. 

"Do we want directional combat? - Yes/no"
"Do we want hardcounters? - Yes/no"
"Do we want battalions? - Yes/no"
Etc. etc.

Edit: to clear my point more: First you have to know if you need something, and if you need it it's worth the effort to make it. Because once done it adds value to the game and brings it forward in development. This is something that seems to be forgotten here. And also this is the reason why I do not create another sub mod for 0 AD - much effort with no benefit because it's not taken over into the core game anyways. Just like DE or any other gameplay improving mod.

 After these decisions were done there need to be tickets/sub sections to think of ways how the details of such game parts are shown ingame. And then programmers should start working on the implementation or suggest/discuss about ways to implement it in a cool way. After that playtesting, thinking of ways to improve it and then tweak again until you get a nice result. 

Then you get a useful progress. The people who are part of the team will see that the tech demo becomes more and more of a game with each design step fulfilled and one day you get a proper release that you can call "playable beta" - which then is a real game, not a graphic demo anymore. If even the devs themselves do not want to play the game - why should someone else want to play it?

And once again - I didn't say you have to take my concept and put it live. I just said that someone has to take charge on this matter and without it 0 ad will fail. As can be seen in every discussion that I read over here.

Edited October 9, 2017 by DarcReaver

[av93]

6 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Why no join forces?

But without these sense of superiority or pride that some people have.

We did before  Council of modders.

 

For all somewhat new members, this has been tried before, like Sibyllae Vox. But I think that's great to see in very mod new suggestions or balance tweaks that can be added to the main game.

 

1 hour ago, elexis said:

> I certainly won't waste dozens of hours to create another base game mod that noone plays.

Just directional damage by itself will cost many weeks if not months.

Well, I would have to said that this effort wouldn't be in vain. The code would be added to the engine, and it could be used for another game.

[Zeta1127]

I play singleplayer, because I consider multiplayer to be optional, which is why I rarely play multiplayer games and haven't taken to kindly to the shift in focus toward online multiplayer that has occurred in recent years.

Perhaps an increase in training time is necessary in order to slow down the game a bit. But other than that, formations with bonuses to adequately portray ancient warfare, food trickle and other bonuses from the Corral, and proper naval combat are all that is needed at this point.

[WhiteTreePaladin]

23 hours ago, elexis said:

Looks unrealistic yes, but since why would snowflake searocks be unplayable? Had fun matches there I wouldn't want to miss.

I don't have anything against it. But if you were wanting a random "traditional" map, it's a rather unpleasant surprise. It's also sort of unplayable on small map sizes. Would be nice if we had a better filter system than just keywords for naval, demo, triggers, etc.

Edited October 10, 2017 by WhiteTreePaladin

[balduin]

@DarcReaver half a year is nothing for developers, keep that in mind. 0 A.D. produces approx. two releases per year. Which is very fast development speed.

[sphyrth]

Here are Darc's main theses as I understand them:
1. He's been here for years, and little to no improvement has been made
2. The updates we see are arbitrary at best (not really improvements)
3. Game Design first before producing features! All we have been getting are a bunch of features that don't really define how the game should be played; aimless updates.
4a. I tried modding with people (See Sybillae Vox), but the core game (which is broken) gets all the attention.
4b. Even if the Mod is successful, if all people see is the core game, won't like it and leave.
4c. That's what's happening with Delenda Est.
5. Etc

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

My quip about the random maps is that they are indicative of a much larger issue, in that there is no coherent game concept anymore for 0 A.D. Empires Ascendant. I would much rather have 10 well-designed, balanced, and beautiful random map scripts that form a coherent theme with the game, than have 1000 random maps of extremely variable quality and no relation to each other.

Empires Ascendant

Everything should form around that concept. Ancient cultures clashing in order to make their empire reign supreme. How did they fight? Where did they colonize? How can you capture that feel and make a fun game in the process?

And yes, it does seem like every single design decision, and I mean significant design decision, requires a UN Security Council resolution in order to proceed. No offense to @shieldwolf23, because he seems like a good guy, but his kumbaya suggestion where there's this grand meeting of the minds is bound to fail. You'd be taking decisions away from the Security Council and giving them to the General Assembly, where factions will form and lines drawn in the sand. No bueno. 

 

15 hours ago, DarcReaver said:

"Do we want directional combat? - Yes/no"
"Do we want hardcounters? - Yes/no"
"Do we want battalions? - Yes/no"
Etc. etc.

While it is beneficial to create such a wish list, I think you will agree Darc that a real coherent concept must be decided first, then features can be chosen in order to convey that concept. I would wager such wish lists have been created by the team before. And then a new set of volunteer devs come along, scrap the old wish list or don't even know it exists, and create a new wish list, all while not having or agreeing to even the general concepts these gameplay items are supposed to support.

Both Darc and I presented strong, coherent, complementary game concepts many many months ago. Those threads are dead. In the vacuum created by no coherent design, multiple mods sprang up to try to improve the game. And it's true: my mistake was trying to develop alongside SVN. But doing so made it clearer to me that there's no there there. And this isn't a knock against the programmers. Hey, coders gonna code. But when are designas gonna design? Right now, the game is only cosmetically conveying its theme and feels more like a bad Starcraft clone with Rise of Nations' territory concept tacked on. And what design there is being done is in service of "balancing" a game that doesn't even know what it is yet.

[Grugnas]

7 hours ago, Zeta1127 said:

Perhaps an increase in training time is necessary in order to slow down the game a bit. But other than that, formations with bonuses to adequately portray ancient warfare, food trickle and other bonuses from the Corral, and proper naval combat are all that is needed at this point.

I agree,  the game is already too frenetic while managing army at moment and perhaps an overall build and training time reduction would be really nice.

[Lion.Kanzen]

The lack of counters make it worse @wowgetoffyourcellphone

Even(sorry if I hurt...) even Clash Royal have counters and its funny.

Edited October 10, 2017 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

21 minutes ago, Grugnas said:

I agree,  the game is already too frenetic while managing army at moment and perhaps an overall build and training time reduction would be really nice.

The game is spam an massive army and win.

 

[shieldwolf23]

@wowgetoffyourcellphone - and no offense taken. I guess I'm really naive to think that in 0 AD core team, it will work. In the Council of Modders, we do have something like that, and so far, our decisions are made by the majority (or majority of those who are active). 

[Lion.Kanzen]

We need our own programmers, probably these our weakness.

My desire of making a funny RTS(no rats @#$%ing auto spell corrector)  is more huge than my knowledge.

 

Edited October 10, 2017 by Lion.Kanzen