mimo

WFG Programming Team
  • Content count

    362
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

mimo last won the day on March 9

mimo had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

269 Excellent

1 Follower

About mimo

  • Rank
    Duplicarius

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. Strange, in my own tests, it built cult statues. Currently the patch only works well for simple requirements like vesta temple. If the Arch needs glory, somebody has to learn him how to accumulate glories, that was not the purpose of D654.
  2. The AI knows it (that's the easy part), but somebody must write the logic to find a good location (what are the requirements for a good position, how far from your borders, how to defend it, ...).
  3. I've made a patch for the phasing up, with the delenda requirements in. Could you test it? https://code.wildfiregames.com/D654
  4. I've no time left to work on mod's support, but some of the points listed here looks generic enough and should definitively be implemented. When A22 is out, i may have a look at the phase requirements, but don't think i can do much more. You should post tickets on trac about them (with the AI keyword) hoping that they may get the attention of some developpers.
  5. Should be https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/19209 so already quite old
  6. No that won't be enough because the update to 17.04 seems to remove the libboost-filesystem-dev package (I had the same problem yesterday when switching to 17.04 and had to reinstall it with apt get). So check that you have libboost-dev and libboost-filesystem-dev packages installed and then proceed as Itms said.
  7. @wowgetoffyourcellphone : how can it be complex to have the fields decay when unattended and regenerate when attended? that's on the contrary something which looks natural to me, and certainly not less natural no more complex than having health regen when passing nearby a temple, or when idle if we have a medecine tech. Futhermore, while i understand that everybody can change its mind, it's funny how you can say the exact opposite of what you said previously in this same thread that does not support taking your opinion too seriously, at least up to the next change of mind @WhiteTreePaladin : why would you ever need to keep track of these rates? do you also try to follow the changes of rate each time a man comes near a female? hopefully not! a game should stay a game, not a mind torture. For me, the only useful information is the base rate (knowing that a female is x% more efficient than a given male soldier), this does not change because of tech, mill, auras ..., nor because of D227, except the female aura which you should then also find much too complicated! @niektb : as said before, no complexity here. And don't worry, nobody has asked you to give a yes or a no, my only demand was to test the patch for people to give a useful feedback Just to clarify what is D227: fields are built much faster (15s instead of previous 50s), but starts with a lower rate which increases with time. Typically after 2 mn, it reaches the nominal rate which won't change anymore as long as you have people working on it. As fields are long term resources, nobody cares about the rate of these 2 first mn. Then when abondonned, the rate that the field can provide decreases, and this "field rate" is visualized by the health bar (the field is destroyed when the health reaches 0). What it brings is that, when a field is half destroyed because of an attack, it looks more natural for me that the farming rate is decreased accordingly during the time the field is restored. And if when attacked, you garrison all your gatherers in the nearest cc, your fields will start to decay, which also looks more natural, but more importantly that makes raids against fields more efficient even if the defender has used the town bell.
  8. It seems that this discussion has derived so much from its original topics that it is becoming useless and should be recentered. I'll just add my own feelings on some of the points raised: - several kind of food is good imo if they are different enough (which is currently the case) and allow more diversity in the gameplay. I would say that it is to the map maker to make its map interesting by a good placement of berries and animals for hunt. The only potential problem i see is with fields and corrals which both provide infinite sources, but as specified above, corral's implementation is far from complete and we should find a way to make it more interesting. In addition, one possibility is to remove the slaughter attack to cav, so that they can't kill domestic animals while still being able to hunt, that would be more realistic and also would make corrals only a supplemental source of food for some maps where fields are difficult to place or when we will have a variable rate depending on the terrain (that rocky or snowy maps have their food better based on corrals rather than fields for example would be nice to force diverse gameplay). That both fields and corrals are not feature complete is to my mind an important fact to keep in mind. - concerning citizen soldiers, i'm completely for keeping them and do not agree at all with the comments that it is a broken concept. I think it is rather a very nice one which adds some originality to 0ad compared to other games. In addition, the player has to make some choice between investing in cs which are weak but can gather or in champions. They are also more realistic. Now let's go back to the original topic (now in https://code.wildfiregames.com/D227) which is to make the rate of fields variable (relatively slow when the field is built, and then increasing with time up to its nominal rate) so that at the beginning other sources are more interesting, but after some time, fields would become the dominant one. The second mecchanism in D227 is that when unattended, fields productivity starts decreasing, which makes them more vulnerable to raids. I'd be happy to have feedbacks, but preferrably from people having tried the patch. General discussions on gameplay should rather stay in one of the numerous other threads we already have in this forum.
  9. If it was something like that, i would be able to reproduce it. So either it is a problem concerning your setup (Window/Linux maybe, did you use the latest window build?) or i made something wrong when trying to reproduce. Could anybody else reproduce it?
  10. Yes, i recompile myself on linux.
  11. There was some rounding in the past done in the simulation which had created this kind of problems, but it was fixed by moving the rounding to the gui. So it should be ok (neither the sim nor the ai apply rounding anymore). Anyway, as i can't reproduce it, it must be something else. Maybe you need a rebuild (I'm on linux). There is a problem currently with jenkins, and windows builds fail. Have you tried to recompile yourself?
  12. I've just tried with your newest version, and can't reproduce the problem. Maybe try to clear your cache. it seems that the AI thinks the building is not yet finished (it happened in the past when there was a rounding problem between the hitpoints in the simulation and the one transfered to the AI. But that should be fixed now).
  13. I've just tried with your github version, and do not reproduce the problem. But the repository was not updated since 20 days, so certainly a recent change you did (it does not happen in vanilla game). How can you say the units are gathering? they look idle in the screenshot. Have you tried the "display the selection state" in the developper overlay? what is the unitAI state of these units?
  14. To remove some templates, you can simply add some DisabledTemplates in the map xml file: that's an array containing all the templates which should be removed for this map. It can be used either for specific player if inside its PlayerData (see an example in scenarios/Death Canyon map) or directly for all players if outside the PlayerData (see an example in scenarios/Belgian Bog map).
  15. Yes, i've seen it but i'm far from convinced such a tool can improve the AI without an internal understanding of the topology, available resources, obstructions and so on. But i'd be happy to be wrong.