FeXoR

Not shipped with the game itself for you have to trust the author of a modifications (it contains code) ... and that everyone has to decide for himself. Feel free though to upload your modification to this forum so others can see it through and use it The preferred format would be a zip file.

It's perfectly understandable to be angry about false claims and accusations! EDIT: And maybe even necessary to keep the people making those claims in their places.

Hi @Isfador1 What you have in mind is not just a map since you also want to change e.g. units bounty and what buildings which units can build. I'd suggest you write a mod (game modification) based on the public mod (the default game content and many game rules) but slightly change the things you have in mind. In general if you like to dive deeper into 0 A.D. see http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki For information about mods see http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Modding_Guide To change what can be build and what can't as well as how much bounty the units grant when killed see http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Entity Have a pleasent stay EDIT: And for more information about Atlas (0 A.D.'s map editor) see http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Atlas_Manual_Starting

I agree that was bad manner at least and I also agree with how Age of Kings Heaven forum adminitrators handled the issue. I don't agree with "we won" though since IMO it'd be in the interest of our contributors and 0 A.D. in general if our contend would be used widely (obaying to the lisenses that is ofc.). And now the links are removed making it harder/less likely that people can enjoy the work of them (the creators of the mod) and others (e.g. 0 A.D. contributors). (If the links targets are still there in the first place that is...)

I find that rather sad. It would be nice if stuff from 0 A.D. would be used widly (Abiding to the lisences that is of cause!)

(Please check my answer for errors It was more a quick reply on IRC. Still thanks @stanislas69 for adding this )

Hi @tmm88 For my taste As I Look Towards the Margin, I see a Glimmer... is much to repetitiv (reminds me of techno) and also lacks a harmoneous ending. I like Sorrow though. I'm still a bit irritated by that MIDI sound (feels like console game music ) and is feels slightly like a gothic theme (I'm quite sure I'm not using the correct terms here :/ ). I'm not making any implications about if this track will be used for 0 A.D. and don't intend to do: That's @OmriLahav decision to make and I hope you understand that we are very greatfull for his extraordinary contributions to 0 A.D. and value his decisions and quality of work. However I still want to give you feedback since I like that second song of yours quite a lot and would be exited to her it played with life instruments Thanks for sharing your work with us

If a player is sieged the resources within that players arrea of influence are limited. So that accounts for "starvation". (This also goes for trading for the possible traderoutes are short)

I don't have a strong opinion on adding this game mode. I think though that if this is needed it's a sign of poor game design because strategic spots doesn't emerge on their own from the game rules (dynamic of units interaction, defensive structures, passability handling etc.). I mainly agree with @elexis: There should be a script that runs after the map (of whatever kind) was loaded that places the points if none are present on the original map (So placing the points is optional). 1.) The authors of most maps of 0 A.D. may not be reachable any more 2.) Adding work for all maps for only one of many victory conditions is a bad tradeoff. 3:) If a map was not made with gamemode in mind (so every map we have) there might simply not be a well distributed number of points on a map suiting as victory spots. This is possible but should be optional as mentioned above. Thanks for notifying me I also would like to add that the wording "victory points" seem to be used for 2 entirely different things in this thread: 1.) Lokactions/buildings/entities on the map to be "captured"/held by a player. (Maybe call them "Victory spots"?) 2.) A kind of resource for each player that raises or drops dependent on the possession of entities in 1.). (Maybe call them "Dominance"?) I guess if a players "Dominance" reaches 0 that player loses the game?

In my opinion we generally have made the right choices: - Building placement depends on (among other things) the slope (though I didn't read the code exactly it's something very similar at least). In the pictures of the fortresses the buildings are placed on high ground mainly, not high slope. Actually one can clearly see that they are build at the edge where steep terrain begins, so they actually avoid it. This is both realistic (though one can build entire towns inside a cliff it's not done that often) and helps to avoid problems with units not being able to reach a structure (though this still can happen and without a passability/buildable area overlay it's hard to detect e.g. when creating a map). - Buildings have a "foundation" reaching into the ground. Though this definitely might not fit some tastes of visual appeal it's better than both other options (flying buildings and terrain flattening below the building) IMO. Why terrain flattening doesn't really solve the issue/invokes more issues than it solves is a bit harder to explain. Posts about terrain flattening: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/18265-terrain-flattening/#comment-285151 https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/16762-building-construction-terrain-flattening/#comment-255903 Thanks @Juli51 for reporting this though. I at least find it hard to keep track of all issues there are in 0 A.D. @wraitii: While I don't agree textures and passability should be linked by default one could paint passability (or other terrain properties) in Atlas/random maps (Not sure if that is possible yet). Since both are placed on tiles one could add "custom terrain" that paints both at once, the texture and unpassability. That could lead to unexpected behavior of the game leaving the player puzzeled why he can't a building at a specific spot if we don't show the overlay when a player is about to place a building (by default, may be a setting). I'm unsure about adding such a feature would be really a gain for the common case if there is not allready a "buildable" propperty for tiles

If the procedure is compatible with our lisences I'm for it. I'm not entirely sure what is meant by "package it in Universe" and I wonder why that is needed in the first place. A static fixed version of 0 A.D. (the AI learned with) download link and a README where to put 0 A.D. to make "Universe" link to it should do.

While there are IMO arguments for both I can live with aiming for circular maps. Would be nice it that where in some documentation. Not entirely sure where to put it... I'll work on that for random maps.

Could you please point me to the reference you took that from? (I couldn't find it in the Design Document or the Technical Design Document) EDIT: Maybe this (Thanks @Imarok for pointing me to it ):

Yea, I only saw it in this video.

Packing the video in a spoiler block should also prevent the video from starting automatically.

When I played the video at this post as is, embedded in this forum, a commercial was shown before the actual video started. I didn't go to the twitch hompage and watched it there. BTW: The link in the frame of the video to twitch doesn't work for me embedded , but if I open only that frame the link works.

Really? I didn't remember to have seen any commercials in embedded youtube videows yet. Only on youtube itself. Not sure.

@elexis While I entirely agree that viewing those videos after the lifestream is awesome ... you just added content containing advertisement to our forum ;/

Yes, @Mermert, we plan do add losing the connection for some time means losing the game. It's not yet entirely sure how it will be handled in the end. Rated games are not really supported yet, though. We need a server to host the games, not the players themselves, for that. So rated games are just there to test the functionality that's allready there, not so much an official feature (Though I'm quite sure some team members would disagree ).

Well, this contains the main reason why I don't like this idea so much: More attention for higher outcome. There are enough excessively micromanagement dependent RTS games out there. I'd like 0 A.D. to be more the "convinient" type of RTS where the more boring/repititive tasks are automated, not so much the "hasty" kind where the faster clicking player wins (Being faster still helps ofc., it's a large army RTS in the end).

What is that supposed to mean? PPL with a slow or unstable internet connection are AFAIK meant to play 0 A.D. (hence the rejoin option - if I'm not misstaken). People who leave the game and don't rejoin within a given ammount of time should simply be handled as losing the game - since they are not playing it. I'm quite sure "noob" is a plain insult and should be avoided - even if noone specific is pointed at! Same goes for "trolls" IMO - ask a moderator and they can handle the case if seen fit. And in general: Identifying players that don't fit well in a particular game is not as easy as looking at some stats IMO... and definitely a matter of taste.

@fcxSanya To generate a random map the seed, the player data (slot, civ, team for each player) and the map size is needed (and ofc. the random map script itself). (And I also would assume that "restart match" or something generates the same map and seed) @Lion.Kanzen Please don't call it "code", it's the seed Nothing magical going on here, it's basically just the index of the first used bit in that - quite long - (pseudo) random long raw of bits where all the random values then come from (sometimes it's given as hexidicimal rather than decimal so it may look like a code). If I'm to technical, ignore me ;p @jonbaer While this is possible in theory generating a map needs several seconds (like 1-80, I'd guess about 10-20 on an average system, normal or medium map size) and to loading it in the engine to render and then take a screenshot again takes several seconds (I'd say about 10?). So it might take quite some time to take screenshots of, say, the first 100 seeds of a random map ... like 2 hours CPU lock. I'm not against adding such a feature but don't use it as an argument "those random maps generate to slow"... (And I'm quite sure if we implement an actual generation for the given player settings as preview I will point back to this post ;p)

@balduin In general I agree with you but this is a problem beyond the scope of 0 A.D.. Compatibility issues with hardware and there proprietary drivers with open source operating systems is well know for a long time (and it's unlikely to go away). (EDIT: This basically arrises from the different concepts of commercial/open source that at some points contradict ... and that is a big playground not only 0 A.D. is in) While we can try to support grafic settings that decently run on many systems with open source drivers it's beyond our scope to provide functionality that is not present in such drivers IMO. So basically it stays your decision what driver to use. Lets hope that similar issues won't arrise with the CPU/bootup systems ... stay tuned because it likely will and allready is for some hardware!