suggestions Thread for posting suggestions for Alpha 27.

[Frederick_1]

Yes I know about this tools. They show ship area.  but it is not precise in the question which ship type can pass on shallow water and which not.

[Stan`]

2 hours ago, Frederick_1 said:

Yes I know about this tools. They show ship area.  but it is not precise in the question which ship type can pass on shallow water and which not.

I think it's the same depth for all ships. What matter then is the width of the passage. You can also run the simulation in atlas and find out

[Frederick_1]

This is how I do it. It is a time consuming iterative process.  From my observation I'd say fisher boat and merchantman need a tad less water depth than warship. But this is observation from real maps. Not a precise examination with test layout. I am not IT enough to examine the code.

[LienRag]

What would be really needed would be a roadmap for the game, actually.

So balancing between civilizations would be done on specific versions (like 0.30, 0.35,...) and other releases could be for experimenting different things.

[Stan`]

Release process takes a day (About 15hours) it takes months to get all linuxes up to date. Some are still in A22-A23

We don't have a stable team of balancers (or anything really) so making roadmaps is impossible because there might be nobody to work or fix things tomorrow.

 

 

[LienRag]

On 01/12/2022 at 10:00 AM, Stan` said:

We don't have a stable team of balancers (or anything really) so making roadmaps is impossible because there might be nobody to work or fix things tomorrow.

I disagree entirely.

Respecting roadmaps may be impossible for the reasons you've stated but making roadmaps certainly is not.

Joke aside, a roadmap that is "more what you'd call a guideline than actual rules" is still actually useful as it gives, well, guidelines about what is expected at a specific release or what can/should be postponed.

[Stan`]

2 hours ago, LienRag said:

Respecting roadmaps may be impossible for the reasons you've stated but making roadmaps certainly is not.

What's the point of a roadmap that won't be followed because it cannot be enforced?

2 hours ago, LienRag said:

Joke aside, a roadmap that is "more what you'd call a guideline than actual rules" is still actually useful as it gives, well, guidelines about what is expected at a specific release or what can/should be postponed

Love that quote. That being said the goal is not to give people expectations and then disappoint them...

[Akira Kurosawa]

Since the Spartans don't have a stone wall but only a wooden one, could you make it more visually unique? There is another option - to give the Spartans a stone wall, but thin and weak like a wooden one.

This looks extremely dismal:

Spoiler

But it looks like Sparta had stone walls...

Spoiler

 

[Gurken Khan]

Can we have the indicator back that a ship is being repaired?

There was a hammer symbol together with how many people worked on it. With ships being dumb and coastlines being difficult it didn't always work, so I'd prefer if I could see at first glance if works.

Edit: It shows when the ship is empty; can we have that it shows regardless?

Edited December 9, 2022 by Gurken Khan

[Stan`]

@Freagarach separation of build and repair caused this maybe?

[Bellaz89]

I bet that this was already discussed in the past, but what about having scrollable/rewindable replays?

Like having a scroll-bar that represents the time in a game, and the user can set an arbitrary position where to start the replay?

This would be very helpful particularly in large maps/multiplayer where many things happen at the same time and it is difficult to track everything at later stage of the game without restarting the complete replay.

I understand that this might be challenging giving how are done and saved in 0AD (an initial state + a simulation that propagates such state) though.

 

EDIT: see this Starcraft 2 replay for example:

On the right ~middle there is a scrollbar that can be dragged to move the game at an arbitrary time. When the replay is unpaused it just moves forward.

Edited December 17, 2022 by Bellaz89

[Loki1950]

Would require a major rewrite of the whole engine as repays ATM are just a text list of commands from each client replayed though the engine start to finish otherwise OOS errors are introduced.

Enjoy the Choice  

[Bellaz89]

4 hours ago, Loki1950 said:

Would require a major rewrite of the whole engine as repays ATM are just a text list of commands from each client replayed though the engine start to finish otherwise OOS errors are introduced.

Enjoy the Choice  

Mmm, does it require rewriting the entire engine @Loki1950? What about generating on-the-fly state checkpoints at regular time intervals, like 10-30s, during a replay using a 'regular' simulation (might be done in the main or a separate delayless offscreen thread)? Since a player/observer can reconnect to a multiplayer game after it started, there should already be a way to serialize and deserialize the entire game state and start a new simulation from that state. Couldn't the same approach be used to load an arbitrary game state and implement this feature?

 

Probably this approach wouldn't be the best in terms of user waiting time when scrolling to another checkpoint. Still IMHO way better than the actual situation where you have to close/restart/run the replay until the ROI manually every time you have to 'look in the past'.

Edited December 18, 2022 by Bellaz89

[Stan`]

Well you still have to compute the state. I suppose you could do it non visually then offer the checkpoints you are talking about. 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

In the random map Frontier, you can choose team placement:

Could this be done for mainland and some other random maps?

I think it would be great!

[chrstgtr]

15 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

In the random map Frontier, you can choose team placement:

Could this be done for mainland and some other random maps?

I think it would be great!

+1

There are a lot of maps I don't like to place solely because of placement. This could really help address

[leopard]

3 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

In the random map Frontier, you can choose team placement:

yes It is possible I have done that in my buggy mod "Mainland Twilight", right now there are some bugs in the frontier like team placement,  https://github.com/Haroldgomez777/0ad-maximalists-map
will fix it when I am free and let everyone know about it.

Edited December 23, 2022 by leopard

[leopard]

3 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Could this be done for mainland and some other random maps?

 

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

Sahara biome:

Cretan date palm forest: 300 wood

Other mixed forest: 200/100 wood

Suggestion: change all forests to Cretan Date palm

Reason: it creates wood imbalance between players

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Just get rid of the Cretan Date Palm from the Saharan biome. It's not accurate anyway.

[LienRag]

On 27/11/2022 at 5:56 PM, Frederick_1 said:

It is the same for land based entities, when a map becomes mountainous. It is sometimes hard to guess which path is cross able and which not is sometimes surprising.

 

Indeed and it would be nice to have this fixed.

But still, it's not the same problem than building a dock somewhere and noticing only later that the ships can't cross to the main water area...

[LienRag]

On 04/12/2022 at 12:37 AM, Stan` said:

What's the point of a roadmap that won't be followed because it cannot be enforced?

The fact that it cannot be enforced doesn't mean that it won't be followed at all, since it establishes a common agreement of what is considered useful.

Eisenhower famously said that "plans are useless, but planning is indispensable".

[LienRag]

One real improvement that Alpha 26 brought is that the mini-map is now actually a mini-map instead of a mini map.

I mean, it's not just a repetition in smaller size of the big map, but it now bears very clear and legible symbols for all the important things (you don't have just a yellow spot for a gold mine, that could be confused with a yellow player unit, you now have a very clear symbol meaning "there is gold here".

It could be even nicer if there was a way to toggle off/on all these symbols, when a player is in need of something specific.

Also, there's a huge problem with relics : they are crucially important, yet once you spotted one but moved your unit away from it (because it's useless to try to capture it with only one unit) you have no way of remembering where it was.

There are two possible solutions :

1 - Make the symbol for relics stay on the map, with a greyed color when it's not currently visible (since it may have moved). Of course remove the greyed symbol if the location becomes visible again and the relic isn't there anymore.

2 - Allow to put "pins" on the map, so when you explore and want to remember where the relic was (or another thing, like a commercial road) you can pin it.

 

For the normal map, I find it often difficult to see where exactly is the highest point of an area (I mean, if there's a small mound somewhere, which is the highest point of that mound ? It's often really not obvious to see).

It would be nice to be able to toggle geographic curves view...

Also, when placing a tower, it would be nice to see the exclusion zone for other towers that it provokes. What is visible is only its range, which (from what I understand) is different.