0AD - Is it 2D or 3D - like SWG, ETC.

[Nebula]

Am sorry maybe am blind, for I can't find it. Where can I download oad game?

How do I pay for it? Where do I find the web site, if any?

[Dnas]

It is a 3d game, as the screenshots show.

You can't download it yet because it isn't finished.

You don't pay for it because it will be free.

The wesite is at the top.

http://wildfiregames.com/0ad/

[Nebula]

thanks.

A 3d game = online game ??

Am sorry for this, but I have trouble to see the different of this two game.

3d game is for me, like civ3, alpha centauri and online game is for me, like ao, swg, la2, neocron2.

[Gunthahaha]

It will be a 3D Real Time Strategy game with a multiplayer mode...

[Dnas]

This is an RTS game, like Age of Empires, Age of Mythology, Starcraft, Warcraft, etc. 3d means it will have 3d graphics, like AoM.

[Red_08]

Yes, the graphics hopefully will be just as good too. (yes I am very optimistic about this game )

[Mythos_Ruler]

Some would say our graphics already surpass AOM. Now we're gunning for AOE3 level graphics...

[Nebula]

Thanks guys.

Be like starcraft, warcraft is nice and I like it.

I hope I have the opportunity to play the game.

[Paal_101]

If you are around in 2006 you should

[Red_08]

I don't have a good enough computer to test it out, so I can only see it at Nate's house.

[Bakayaro]

What about army sizes in the game?

Starcraft, AOK, AOM, etc... had ridiculous army sizes, so the graphics were made smaller and less detailed to reduce in-game latency.

WCIII uses ridiculously high-detail models, but the armies are small, changing the gameplay significantly.

As you can see, army size is an important facet of the game.

[Titus Ultor]

Isn't there a tentative pop cap of 75? I think its in the FAQ.

[Sam]

* Is there a limit to the number of units that can be on a map at a time?

The Population Limit will be as high as we can make it within the constraints of hardware on release. We won't know until we actually start testing, but currently assume a cap of 150.

* Why is there a population limit of 150 units per player?

This is our first game of this scale and we're trying to maintain reasonable requirements, so this is an initial conservative estimate. Should we exceed these limits and maintain decent performance, we could certainly increase them.

* But won't we hit that cap very quickly?

A number of game mechanics have been designed to make individual units more formidable and scale back the need to have five times as many units/buildings to gain the effectiveness of one, so it's a matter of quality over quantity.

Secondly, basic military units share economic abilities as "Citizen Soldiers", and therefore dedicated gatherers are no longer occupying a significant share of the player's population limit.

[Titus Ultor]

Oh, yeah. That's much higher than what I thought.

I was too lazy to check it myself. >.>

[Nebula]

It’s something I wonder and that is: ....assume a cap of 150.

When some one asking about cap, what does it mean??

[Sam]

Cap is the population cap, the amount of units a player can own/have at any one time.

[Acumen]

Though keep in the mind that the FAQ merely reflects information at the time of writing it, and is highly subject to change. Conservative conceptual phase estimates are likely to adjust depending on more accurate insights discovered through actual implementation.

In other words, until it has an accompanying completed game, the FAQ is a guide for what is likely to happen, not a gospel of what shall be forevermore.

[Nebula]

Game like AO, SWG or other games use this cap. So do they mean the same way?? I think as a max number or something you can’t go further. But I also think is a divide of a number, so they can't go so fast to a max number, something. It's only therefore I ask, for am be confused what its mean. Am sorry if I didn't use FAQ, because it didn't answer my question at all, so am sorry for that. I have used FAQ many times before but normally they don’t give me an answer for my question.

[Lorian]

Did ent? Is that supposed to be didn't?

[Acumen]

Nebula: It means that each player can't have more units on the map than that specified by the cap. So if the cap is 200, each player can't have more than 200 units at a time (so if there are 8 players, that'd ensure there are no more than 1,600 units in the game at a time, so players can't build unlimited units and slow the game to a crawl as it does continuous calculations for them).

(That's assuming that each unit is worth one population point, of course; some games have infantry worth 1 point and cavalry 2 points, depending on the complexity -- horse and rider takes more polys than just the humanoid unit -- and strength of the unit).

[Bakayaro]

In SC, the buildings counted as units, but didn't take up psi (pop). However, the map could only hold a max of 1600 units.

In 4v4s, people occasionally surrounded their bases with about... 200-400 defense structures (photon cannons, missile turrets, colonies, etc..) and zerg players would typically, in the $$ hacked map, have at least 20 hatcheries, producing 3 larvae each, so that's another 80 units.

Typically these games would end up overloading the map, even before psi limits (pop caps) were reached.

So set a map limit and a pop cap, since buildings can be complex too.

[Lorian]

Yeah but the CPU doesn't have to calculate anything for buildings, only units

[Nebula]

thanks for all help.

[Acumen]

Yeah but the CPU doesn't have to calculate anything for buildings, only units

Not exactly; buildings still have their own properties that need to be accounted for (researching, training, garrisoning, increasing housing, sometimes attacking, etc). However, they don't move around (costly pathfinding) or have the wide variance of animations and related actions that units do.

Good point, though, Bakayaro, as buildings do still take their share of the available processing time.

[Fire Giant]

However, they don't move around...

←

Let's say: They do not move around any more Remember the old build in summer where you could send houses to walk (or probably better: "hover") around the map?