All Activity

Exactly. In SP at least, all buildings being destroyed once the CC has been captured is oindee a pity

Alright, but definitely not when the building is finished. Destroy after use will not brign back any resources? Too bad.

Correct.

@ThalattaIt's been suggested countless times that the first post needs to be approved by a mod; I support that, regardless of the alphabet. I've never seen an official statement regarding this, so I don't know why it's not done.

Preparing to build bridges as well ? (could not resists)

Few seconds ago, for the second time today, one of my posts was hidden until approval, bc I set a link to gitea.wildfiregames.com. Maybe this site can be put on the white list for obvious reasons.

See the new PR #9157 (+ grammar correction of Catafalque name)

From what I've seen, maybe posts written in Cyrillic should require mod approval.

Well, I think those corrections are trivial and should take less than a minute, but I guess I have to start doing this at some point... Just to be sure: I have to create an user on git, apparently not directly linked to the one of this forum? (Thus people just use the same nicknames and profile pictures).

This is not really the case, either. As I said: Meaning, the amount of resources you get back depends on how much has been actually built. That is, if 35% of the structure has been built, one gets 65% of resources back, and so on, or very close to it, given that I just checked fast for a few proportions.

Luckily. @kheeva, killing all units when resigning would just look awful, in fact I think that's already the case for building total collapse when CC's are captured. If dirty players are abusing this somehow, maybe the diplomatic stance and AI behaviour of abandoned units could be forced into something less exploitable?

When building Structures i.e. an House and this construction site gets destroyed before finishing the House, you'll get some ressources back. Case example: You have 300 Wood and start to build a House that costs 150 Wood. When you self-destroy the construction site, you'll have 285 Wood.

It's indeed an old idea and declared as 'Won't fix': see #2632.

Interesting. It makes me wonder about the possibility of future terraforming: instead of trees needing to be cut for that, if workers could modify terrain level, for ditches and other uses, which reminds me of Morrison's statement in his Greek and Roman Oared Warships: "Agrippa cut channels to the Lucrine Lake to produce a large and safe inland harbour".

Here I will now share a modified map of "battle of the tiber" scenario. I call it "rome with crossing". Water depth is modified so that ships have more movement options. Especially in the swamp area. Altough there first the trees need to be cut. There is also a small foot-path to cross the tiber river in the middle of the map so that land units have a small path to cross the river. Altough not wide enough for rams etc. they still need to take the long way around the bridge. Hence the change of the name. In the beginning only merchants and fisher can pass, also when trees cleared all ships have passage there. Merchantman can travel almost up to Vai while military ships only half the way. There are also lot of treasures all over the map but also to give rome a boost in the start, because they start with no units unlike other parties having a small group of champs. The screenshot shows a arrow ship in the swamp surrounded with worker units. PS: This is the map with my water-fall messing up in topic "waterfalls" Rome-with-Crossing9.xml Rome-with-Crossing9.pmp

Seems like a bug to me. And I wonder how many other mod options have this issue.

Okey, I found the reason..... some time ago, I tested Mod Gui.... and disabled eye candy features. It seems this option is still active when mod is disabled. I need to activate autociv and Mod-Gui [0.28.18] to have the option back in the menu, and with enabling eye candy features the waterfalls are back again. ( Well I have not seen this setting left back in user.cfg) I did not have this in mind because I thought with disabling these mods I can eliminate this reason.

@Sundiata trying to inbox you about an artwork of Amanirenas I'm looking for but my account may be too new

It runs fully sequentially, but there is good potential to parallelize parts of it. This is something I'm working on actually. Yes, I think so. Sadly, I personally don't know enough about it to implement it myself, but I know that there have been experiments/attempts by others in the past.

Depends on what. Rendering and simulation are on the same thread, pathfinding runs in multiple threads. Sound is in its own thread. The OS decide which threads goes onto which core. @vladislavbelov is working on a way to run the rendering on parallel to the next simulation turn. That will help although on higher end machines, rendering isn't so hard on the GPU.

They don't exist as anything but actors. Them being missing in the game is concerning though.

Does 0ad use multi cpu cores, or just one?

When you mention render submission being the main bottleneck, is the core issue that Pyrogenesis's rendering pipeline runs sequentially on a single CPU thread, or is it already multithreaded and just struggling with massive draw call volume late-game? Furthermore, is there any prospect for optimization through GPU instancing to batch identical units and cut down those draw calls?

Is there another way you can use hardware when not all of it is being used, so it can free of some when you need it more?

Pathfinding is not actually as performance expensive as one would think. The individual pathfinding requests each turn can be (and are) nicely computed in parallel by the engine, so on machines with decent hardware concurrency they finish surprisingly fast. The render submission process and rendering itself are a much more perfomance-constraining factor.