Can we agree on this?

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

The thing that you are ignoring is that aside from some basic safety, there is little advantage to be had from killing wildlife since their deaths in no way directly contribute to the victory conditions.  If there was some reward such as food, it would become more plausible to have it done that way.  As such, having the units automatically attack wildlife is a liability.  If there is a low hp unit, they will end up dying due to the player simply marching it too close to a predator.  There are cases in which predators do yield food such as crocodiles in Age of Empires.  Even with this potential benefit though, there are definite risks to fighting against violent animals in the game.  Thus, there is more than only one argument against the current unit behaviour.  

[elexis]

I didn't say B > A, I said C = A+B

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

And why this game's gameplay has stagnated.

[DarcReaver]

You can't even agree to fix such a nuisance? Others would call this a bug. lol...

Ofc friendly fire and wildlife interaction needs to be fixed. Just like in every other RTS game on the market from the last 10 years...

[Hannibal_Barca]

1 hour ago, DarcReaver said:

Ofc friendly fire and wildlife interaction needs to be fixed. 

I'll deduce that you weren't really paying attention neither to the posts nor to the actual game itself (of which you applied to become Gameplay Developer)

Friendly fire is disabled in 0 A.D.

[DarcReaver]

50 minutes ago, Hannibal_Barca said:

Friendly fire is disabled in 0 A.D.

So? Then I guess you also don't need a braking pedal in your car because you never drive on hilly streets and already have a parking brake.

Just because someone set friendlyfire = 0 it's still important to think about it. What if at some it becomes necessary to set friendlyfire = 1? OH NO THE GAME EXPLODES DAFUQ

50 minutes ago, Hannibal_Barca said:

I'll deduce that you weren't really paying attention neither to the posts nor to the actual game itself (of which you applied to become Gameplay Developer)

Dat hostility ... I've read all posts in here and was astonished by the amount nonsense posted here, indeed. If this was part of a patch changelog of another game it would be called "minor bugfix: units no longer accidentally attack wildlife units unless they've been attacked by them first".

Just fix the issue for now by lowering the sight range of units as a workaround. And after that fix the issue properly by separating target aquiring range from sight range. If the engine doesn't support that it's another core issue that needs to be fixed first and should be set on the priority list. 

Maybe some of the devs should actually analyze and play some good RTS games and make notes about the GUI, unit behavior and sight range mechanics and then implement those in 0ad.

 

Edited July 16, 2018 by DarcReaver

[Stan`]

1 hour ago, DarcReaver said:

So? Then I guess you also don't need a braking pedal in your car because you never drive on hilly streets and already have a parking brake.

Just because someone set friendlyfire = 0 it's still important to think about it. What if at some it becomes necessary to set friendlyfire = 1? OH NO THE GAME EXPLODES DAFUQ

Dat hostility ... I've read all posts in here and was astonished by the amount nonsense posted here, indeed. If this was part of a patch changelog of another game it would be called "minor bugfix: units no longer accidentally attack wildlife units unless they've been attacked by them first".

Just fix the issue for now by lowering the sight range of units as a workaround. And after that fix the issue properly by separating target aquiring range from sight range. If the engine doesn't support that it's another core issue that needs to be fixed first and should be set on the priority list. 

Maybe some of the devs should actually analyze and play some good RTS games and make notes about the GUI, unit behavior and sight range mechanics and then implement those in 0ad.

 

Well currently remaining active devs ( I'm counting an average of 2.5 these days) are trying to make the game compliant to European law to at least have the opportunity to be able to fix those.

For everything gameplay related ask both @Itms and @Prodigal Son directly (by Pm for example) as they are rewriting the gameplay document to make it a versionned contributable way of discussing gameplay. They'll know more about it than any of us here. Even though : "its a bug that needs to be fixed"

If you have suggestions for Delenda Est which for now is basically the most popular gameplay mod there is ( according to download stats) you can go in the relevant modding section.

For the matter here patches are better than words. Minor bugfixes are easy heh.

 

Thanks for coming back and contributing in your own way.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Well the reason I posted this thread the way I did was because I thought there would be broad and near unanimous agreement on this topic. Imagine my astonishment and frustration when that turned out to be false, at least from a few key people.

[Stan`]

On 7/8/2018 at 1:09 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Units shouldn't auto-attack nearby lions, tigers, and bears unless those animals attack first.

I just realized I forgot to answer the statement

I agree with the statement. It's particularly annoying at the beginning of a game. However will those animals attack first ? Or will it always be on the player to trigger them ?

If they do decide to attack there should be an ally trigger range. I guess the size of the woman aura or a bit bigger would work.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

2 hours ago, stanislas69 said:

However will those animals attack first ? Or will it always be on the player to trigger them ?

 

I figured work on the unit AI first, then the animal behavior. But even now, the dangerous animals don't always attack. Sometimes they wander around before attacking, which is fine.