Jump to content

FeXoR

WFG Programming Team
  • Content Count

    1,403
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

Everything posted by FeXoR

  1. Hi @roadtripping.ph You may find the command line options helpful: https://svn.wildfiregames.com/public/ps/trunk/binaries/system/readme.txt
  2. @plautus : You could provide that replay. Why that? If I read correctly @Plautius didn't deny that he kicked a player in a 1 vs 1 rated game. And that IMO is exactly what the ban reason claims: Rating fakery. (The result of kicking would be winning the game. And, as @borg- already pointed out, if the aim was not to win, @plautus could have just left the game.) I agree that we could change some settings/tools we provide to avoid this kind of "accident" but it's still the hosts obligation to see his settings are what he wants IMO.
  3. (If a ban was justified at the time of the ban it will stay justified with or without a reply of the banned player or the moderator banning him.)
  4. You can speak now, @plautus
  5. I banned him from the forum and I don't think it was unjust. Most I wrote down in the report comments and am absolutely OK with posting our private conversations in a staff post if anyone in the staff team doesn't agree with banning him. I also think it's also justified to ban him again from the forums for he keeps shouting and using a second account. Without opposition of a team member I'll ban him, soon (but I guess let's wait for the lobby ban to be discussed). I don't have any information about his lobby ban.
  6. Sorry for doubleposting but I felt like my last comment was a bit harsh, @WhiteTreePaladin Yes, switching to another revision system like GIT on our server is an option, but GitHub is not IMO. And, yes, I also don't think GetHub is exceptionally bad right now. But just a slight change in direction in the management can make a service like this basically useless for us.
  7. Stable "bad" sounds even worse to me than unstable bad
  8. Maybe I'm, getting something wrong here but: I don't agree it's good idea at all to pay a company for closing their system! If people on Mac OS want to play 0 A.D., Apple is clearly acting against the interest of their users. If projects supporting Mac OS (by trying to be compatible) need to pay money to actually be installed on Mac OS, Apple is clearly acting against the interest of the developers. So the conclusion for me would be for users and developers - if the condition for each hold true - to turn away from Apple! EDIT: And if the conditions are not fulfilled there's no reason to support Mac OS in the first place.
  9. The public svn repository is hosted here, @Trinketos. For more information see the build instruction page of the wiki. The repository is hosted on a Wildfire Games server (so our own). Also you can browse the source on Phabricator or GitHub (updated from the SVN repository so no patches can be applied there to effect the SVN in return). EDIT: There's also downloads available at Sourceforge. But when Sourceforge started to require login and added malware to many project's installers we withdrew from there. And that's exactly why I don't think GitHub is at all an alternative: You never know when the company goes bad
  10. In the first post of this topic there are the map files to download. From the names containing "3" I think they are updated (Is that correct, @imperium ?) You can put the files into the scenario folder in your Game Data Path to play on it in single player ;)
  11. Since after the opening post there was no meaningful addition and half of the posts where reported I'm closing this topic. If you continue to fill the forum with non useful posts like this, @JC (naval supremacist), I think it's best for the forum and the community to ban you. For I'm quite sure you're capable of that, think about if a comment you wrote is helping anyone. If not, don't post it. EDIT: And @borg-, I really think you shouldn't fuel the fires.
  12. Hi @gameboy :) At the moment the UnitAI (controlling the unit to fulfill the player's orders) is heavily worked on. From the error message I'd guess it's the serialization of the path of an entity that failed (so something related to pathfinder/unitmotion/unitAI). Maybe @wraitii can tell you something more specific.
  13. And what about not rating games in the first place if we can't reliably rate games in the first place? IMO that would make everything much calmer
  14. Posting the title of a book and the author is not violating any copyright (yet ) So being muted for this would be unfortunate. Poor judgement is not unique to bots, though. Human moderators will also make decisions judged as poorly thought through by others from time to time, even if chosen carefully. Considering the heightmaps: AFAIK @elexis checked the sources and removed those not compatible to our license or if our right to use them was questionable. If you notice a copyright violation, please let us know!
  15. Yea, it's the combination of the network model and rating that doesn't fit well together ATM. The neutral third party usually is a server but I'm not sure about the use of resources that requires, especially with increasing numbers of players.
  16. Thanks, @cloud9, I wasn't aware of that (maybe I forgot). As long as that model of trust remains (which I have nothing against in particular but the many reports indicate that the assumption players are trustworthy is false) don't rate games for we don't have the means implemented to with reasonable certainty decide who has won in the first place. EDIT: IMO it's not at all a good idea to support those lying - and we do this by design ATM. Moderators won't solve this.
  17. IMO that solves it then: As long as this model remains there is no way to decide who won a game. So don't rate them.
  18. (IMO the solution to leaving rated games - for whatever reason - is to make that player lose, no moderation needed. If your car breaks in a race you lose it - has been done for decades and noone seemed to have problems with it. That doesn't mean moderators are not useful in other cases! I'd prefer people getting along with each other but - I can dream quite vividly I guess ^^)
  19. Yea, it's astonishing what some fitting algorithms including many kinds of neural network approaches can achieve However, if you quote I would like to ask you to make that clear by using the Quote function and before or after give the source - as you did - and mark it as such e.g. by writing "Source:"). Have a nice day!
  20. Hi @DrunkenRyno I hope you found your way around in the documentation of Atlas (and maybe the map format? Not sure how deep you dug until now). I guess the Scenario Design/Map making subforum is also a good place for looking for what other people have done (e.g. @Skhorn ), what can be done, what to look out for or avoid. If you have some maps to show off with a topic there where you can show screenshots and upload the maps would also be appreciated. If you encounter any problems with Atlas you can always ask here or in the development chat. As @stanislas69 mentioned, if you're really into campaign generation you should ask @wraitii about that. Have a nice stay
  21. AFAIK there was was the concept of "stamina" planned and actually in the game. Wouldn't that have a similar outcome? (Yea, it's also relevant for long trips I guess, not sure if that's good or bad). @Radagast. Sure! ATM we have speed limits (0 to max speed) and turning limits (-max turn rate to max max turn rate) but our entities don't have a property like mass (and the engine doesn't support such concept AFAIK). Momentum is the mass times the speed and thus isn't supported. What I guess you mean is acceleration, how how long it takes a unit to increase it's current speed in a given time (e.g. a game turn). That would be something I'd support but guess that would require basically an entire rewrite of the animations code ... not to speak of all animations - so I don't see that coming. Maybe for Part 2? IMO the issue originates by using a physically realistic approach for the projectile's trajectory but not for the unit's motion. Solving the "dodging projectile" issue is possible in several different ways that doesn't require that big a change. I just mentioned some in my earlier posts. I would consider non of them clean, because they would either broaden the gap between the graphical representation (where the arrow hits) and the outcome in the game (if and which unit is damaged) or be less realistic looking (arrows homing on targets and possible trajectories crossing each other more than twice). But both would solve the issue and improve gameplay (which IMO is more important in a game than realism and graphical representation as graphical representation may be more important in a film or a picture and realism more important in a physicists theses I assume).
  22. I'd recommend using control groups (Hot keys in game). This is a bit unspecific. Do you mean to select all combat units not gathering? (I think that would be somewhat helping sometimes.) Selecting all units should definitely do exactly that IMO: Select all units
  23. Mods: mod, public, Angen-gameplay-mode ... as far as I can tell from the mainlog. ERROR: Failed to find matching prop point called "tree" in model "art/meshes/flora/tree_death.dae" for actor "european_beech" and finally: ERROR: JavaScript error: unsupported type for structured data So I guess it's that missing prop point?
×
×
  • Create New...