A24 feedback.

[ValihrAnt]

I'd also like to hear some thoughts on altering or removing the passive stance. The main problem is with units doing the weird run and thus avoiding shots and baiting the attacking units after them. Most noticable on healers and women with the loom upgrade as units will run straight into the enemy army to try and chase them. Then there's also players who put the hero on passive stance and position the hero in front of their army as an easy alternative to dancing.

Edit. Also with melee units becoming more usable and necessary, dancing should be far more difficult.

Edited February 28, 2021 by ValihrAnt

[seeh]

On 22/02/2021 at 10:27 AM, maroder said:

I think the building hotkeys were property of @naniautociv mod.

yes, but the hotkeys are listend in the settings. that gives confuse for people. and no becouse you/i cant download the mod anymore. so the mod not exist for normal people (how to get it). and no, if you get errors with this mod by joun a game trough the lobby. i missing this building hotkey sooooo much

[seeh]

On 24/02/2021 at 12:25 AM, faction02 said:

I am having issues with the new hotkey menu.

My guess is that a24 doesn't like my "<>\" key between "Shift" and "W" on AZERTY. The issue is that once I try to save it as hotkey, the function break down and I am unable to use it anymore.

I might be missing part of the explanation but I was wondering if this could make sense ?

look like my errors if i have autoCiv intalled in my last ubuntu ( i will try again today. but dont know how to get autoCiv anymore? )

[Stan`]

There is a version on the forums.

[maroder]

16 minutes ago, seeh said:

look like my errors if i have autoCiv intalled in my last ubuntu ( i will try again today. but dont know how to get autoCiv anymore? )

 

[dpikt]

On 23/02/2021 at 1:50 AM, Stan` said:

Does the laptop where it lags have screen scaling ? Eg a 125*% zoom on windows. If so you need to disable scaling foe 0 A.D. by editing properties or disable it entirey

Thanks @Stan`, this fixed the problem


Unrelated note of something I discovered: if the a24 graphics seem sort of low contrast / greyed out for you compared to a23 - you can uncheck "fog" in settings to clear it out at higher zoom. Made a huge difference for me.

Also, it's a bit hidden (imo) but you can disable auto-formations by right clicking "no formation."

Edited March 2, 2021 by dpikt

[chrstgtr]

On 28/02/2021 at 5:32 AM, ValihrAnt said:

I'd also like to hear some thoughts on altering or removing the passive stance. The main problem is with units doing the weird run and thus avoiding shots and baiting the attacking units after them. Most noticable on healers and women with the loom upgrade as units will run straight into the enemy army to try and chase them. Then there's also players who put the hero on passive stance and position the hero in front of their army as an easy alternative to dancing.

Edit. Also with melee units becoming more usable and necessary, dancing should be far more difficult.

I haven't seen anyone abuse it this alpha. With that said, I see little point to having it for fighting units, so I would limit it to only women/healers (units that aren't meant to ever fight and also die quickly) or eliminate it all together

Edited March 2, 2021 by chrstgtr

[Silier]

from my perspective passive should be just passive so do noting.

generally I do not see much use of violent stance since aggressive is good enough while frustrating at the same time because units generally move too far away and one needs to micro them back so I would like to redefine them at some point and then set non combat units to flee by nature (so they would not fight at all) or add them "new" flee stance. 

[faction02]

6 hours ago, chrstgtr said:

I haven't seen anyone abuse it this alpha. With that said, I see little point to having it for fighting units, so I would limit it to only women/healers (units that aren't meant to ever fight and also die quickly) or eliminate it all together

I have seen some spears set to passive before being sent to the battlefield in a24...

Passive can help save melee heroes that can be trained only once. I would guess that for an average player who have all his units in the same control group, having some form of security for his hero would be great.

About healers, I am not sure what is the best solution since it is has negative effects for both the owner of the healers that need to regroup them all the time with the rest of his army and the attackers who need to regroup his soldiers chasing them. 

Just thinking out loud, maybe removing the running part of the flee sequence for military units (and healer?) could reduce the issue and prevent the abuse.

 

4 hours ago, Angen said:

from my perspective passive should be just passive so do noting.

generally I do not see much use of violent stance since aggressive is good enough while frustrating at the same time because units generally move too far away and one needs to micro them back so I would like to redefine them at some point and then set non combat units to flee by nature (so they would not fight at all) or add them "new" flee stance. 

Just giving my own view: I like that it is currently possible to fight with women.

If 20 women are far from safety it seems desirable that they can fight one spear cavalry. Changing stance makes it easier to try to surround the cavalry. I only need to micro each women to their position around the cavalry, no need to click on it on top of it.

I have also changed the stance of women to target several unprotected rams. They would attack the one closer to them before moving to the next one.

This would be an important change to the overall gameplay since civic center and women would be much more vulnerable than they are now. Without testing it extensively, I am not sure if I would like it.

Edited March 2, 2021 by faction02
english corrections

[chrstgtr]

10 hours ago, faction02 said:

I have seen some spears set to passive before being sent to the battlefield in a24...

Passive can help save melee heroes that can be trained only once. I would guess that for an average player who have all his units in the same control group, having some form of security for his hero would be great.

About healers, I am not sure what is the best solution since it is has negative effects for both the owner of the healers that need to regroup them all the time with the rest of his army and the attackers who need to regroup his soldiers chasing them. 

Just thinking out loud, maybe removing the running part of the flee sequence for military units (and healer?) could reduce the issue and prevent the abuse.

I get that people don't want their heros to die. But the onus should be on that player to properly micro or place their hero behind the lines in stand ground instead of on the attacking player who is trying to kill the hero. And in the grand scheme of things, losing 1 hero is much less dangerous than losing an entire army.

Healers could also have reduced HP if they actually cause armies to chance in a way that causes armies to die while following. Their health could be something like women, which die quickly before a chasing army can get destroyed. 

But I agree changing the run/walk feature makes sense regardless. 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

15 hours ago, Angen said:

generally I do not see much use of violent stance since aggressive is good enough while frustrating at the same time because units generally move too far away and one needs to micro them back

Can I advocate once again for an "aggression range" that is separate from vision range? It's the range by which a unit will actively attack another unit or structure. It can be a separate number or a percentage of vision range (kinda like the relationship between walk speed and run speed). Stances would then adjust this range. So, Aggressive would be at 90% of vision range, Defensive would be at 50% of vision range. Point would be to make units easier to control and act less maniacally. 

[Freagarach]

6 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Can I advocate once again for an "aggression range" that is separate from vision range? It's the range by which a unit will actively attack another unit or structure. It can be a separate number or a percentage of vision range (kinda like the relationship between walk speed and run speed). Stances would then adjust this range. So, Aggressive would be at 90% of vision range, Defensive would be at 50% of vision range. Point would be to make units easier to control and act less maniacally. 

This is already how it works in-game? Just that violent and aggressive is 100% vision range, but violent will keep chasing when the player still sees the adversary. Defensive has a query range of 50% of the vision range

That being said, improvements can be done for sure.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

17 minutes ago, Freagarach said:

This is already how it works in-game? Just that violent and aggressive is 100% vision range, but violent will keep chasing when the player still sees the adversary. Defensive has a query range of 50% of the vision range

That being said, improvements can be done for sure.

Is there somewhere where I can edit aggressive to 90% vision range?  

[Freagarach]

UnitAI \o/

Spoiler

Include a file in your components folder, called UnitAI_DE.js (or something alike), with the following content:

Spoiler

UnitAI.prototype.GetQueryRange = function(iid)
{
	let ret = { "min": 0, "max": 0 };

	let cmpVision = Engine.QueryInterface(this.entity, IID_Vision);
	if (!cmpVision)
		return ret;
	let visionRange = cmpVision.GetRange();

	if (iid === IID_Vision)
	{
		ret.max = visionRange;
		return ret;
	}

	if (this.GetStance().respondStandGround)
	{
		let range = this.GetRange(iid);
		if (!range)
			return ret;
		ret.min = range.min;
		ret.max = Math.min(range.max, visionRange);
	}
	else if (this.GetStance().respondChase)
		ret.max = visionRange * 0.9; // << This has changed.
	else if (this.GetStance().respondHoldGround)
	{
		let range = this.GetRange(iid);
		if (!range)
			return ret;
		ret.max = Math.min(range.max + visionRange / 2, visionRange);
	}
	// We probably have stance 'passive' and we wouldn't have a range,
	// but as it is the default for healers we need to set it to something sane.
	else if (iid === IID_Heal)
		ret.max = visionRange;

	return ret;
};

Note this also affects violent stance.

 

 

[Freagarach]

On 22/02/2021 at 1:48 PM, faction02 said:

Woodcutting behavior is sometimes "weird".

IT seems that when a tree is depleted, the units are searching for the next nearest tree to the spot where the last tree was rather than the most efficient one (the nearest tree to the dropsite). 

As a result, units are sometimes drawn far away from the forest by a couple of isolated trees.

 

Fixed in SVN (so for A25).
(For fun: it was commit r25000.)

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

8 minutes ago, Freagarach said:

Fixed in SVN (so for A25).
(For fun: it was commit r25000.)

Nice1

Another thing I noticed was that woodcutters tend to stick to the exact same species or type of tree. For instance if they are tasked to chop a bush, they will stick to bushes instead of going then next to the nearest tree. Anyone else see this too? 

[Lion.Kanzen]

7 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Nice1

Another thing I noticed was that woodcutters tend to stick to the exact same species or type of tree. For instance if they are tasked to chop a bush, they will stick to bushes instead of going then next to the nearest tree. Anyone else see this too? 

I have not noticed it as you are describing it, but I have seen that they go to places far away for reasons that I do not yet understand.

[faction02]

1 hour ago, Freagarach said:

Fixed in SVN (so for A25).
(For fun: it was commit r25000.)

I tested it, it seems to work very well. Great job! 

[Player of 0AD]

The German translations are now poor, while they have been decent in A23.

[Freagarach]

16 hours ago, Player of 0AD said:

The German translations are now poor, while they have been decent in A23.

Feel free to improve them: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Localization.

Edited March 12, 2021 by Freagarach
Link.