FeXoR

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.

Stable "bad" sounds even worse to me than unstable bad

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.

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

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 ;)

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.

IMO a Skirmish map would be better suited for a "Risk" like game

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.

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

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!

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.

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.

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.

(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 ^^)

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!

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

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).

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

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?

If you select a unit and hover the mouse over the sword and shield icon you can see the armor values of that unit for each damage types (hack, pierce and slash) and the corresponding rounded relative damage reduction in % (1/100) behind that in brackets. Considering a unit is hit the damage formula that is calculated here is: [current health reduction of attacked unit] = [damage of attacking unit] * 0.9^[armor of attacked unit] So the damage reduction shown in the game is: round(0.9^[armor of shown unit] / 100).

Your links are not working for me: (Since I am not "trying to view" an item but download it this error message is entirely wrong) Packing the files into a zip and uploading that might help, not sure.

Yes, this map definitely can be improved from a gameplay perspective and I agree with all your points. (I'd consider it a mixture of a beautiful sandbox skrimish great for single player and a somewhat playable multiplayer map.) If you have changed the map so you feel it's the next step worth committing you can always add a patch to phabricator or trac to be reviewed to become part the official game (Since I was called I thought there was an urgent need to update this map in the official repository but even after close comparison I couldn't find any difference between Egypt_1_0_7 in your fist post and "Egypt (3v3)" in the current SVN version. But it's absolutely possible I missed something for I only did check in Atlas.)

Yes, yes, yes! Gorgeous map, @mimesot! It is available in SVN (skirmish maps) including a Kushite settlement so what's left to do?

I thought that much so I didn't really attempt to stop you. And as @Itms said I don't mean that personal against you, @xan2622 Nice gaming to all of you

Yes, I also have in mind they where not implemented at first but thought they where added at some point (at least they where mentioned as planned). Maybe just my wishful thinking