Jump to content


Community Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Andrettin last won the day on April 14 2016

Andrettin had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

101 Excellent

About Andrettin

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,044 profile views
  1. Has thought been given to the idea of players gaining "experience" (or similar) during scenarios, and accruing persistent bonuses? Similar to the various persistent bonuses in Age of Empires Online, or the commander levels for Starcraft 2 co-op. I feel this sort of thing enhances the player feeling of achievement when playing the game. For 0 A.D., it might be better to keep such bonuses for single player only (and stored locally), so that the server does not need to keep track of that for players, and so that competitive multiplayer isn't affected by this.
  2. I just started "start-shell.bat", since the "start-shell-msvc2015.bat" described in the readme wasn't present. Doing as you say could well fix the issue. I've already deleted the files from my previous attempt, but when I try again I'll do that then.
  3. Thanks for the info! I tried using the latest version of mozilla-build and NSPR, but to no avail: I still got the same error when building NSPR (I didn't even get to building SpiderMonkey itself). I'm clearly doing something wrong, but I'm not sure what...
  4. Thanks! I had seen the instructions in the repo, but I haven't got past trying to build NSPR (the "configure" step fails, even with the patch listed in the readme). I've also got some other unrelated errors in the compilation of Pyrogenesis (related to the core CRT). What is SpiderMonkey used for, by the way?
  5. I was trying to build the engine, and I managed to do it like you did (using the 2015 toolchain with VS2019), but since VS2017 has been out for a while I wondered why it wasn't an option. Thanks for the info! I looked into it, and I got it to work mostly, except that there are unresolved symbols from SpiderMonkey. I guess rebuilding it with VS2017 would fix the issue, though of course that would also take some effort.
  6. Is there any particular reason why only MSVC2015 is supported in "update-workspaces.bat", but not MSVC2017? The latest alpha release of premake5 (which is used to generate the projects) does not support MSVC2019, so I understand why that is not supported, but the latest alpha of premake5 does support MSVC2017.
  7. GH is controlled by a private company, but AFAIK given how git works (your local copy has the entire repository information) that is not an issue, since if they change their policies to something intolerable, you can just move the repository to be hosted somewhere else. I think it would be advantageous to host it in GitHub, considering the excellent UI it possesses (both in the desktop and web versions), which IMO makes development much more convenient.
  8. This looks pretty good It could work well as a base for a more grand strategy-like kind of map.
  9. Well, yes, but by making contributing less convenient (e.g. by not taking GitHub pull requests) then you turn away potential contributors.
  10. I think the idea has quite a bit of promise. My suggestion, though, is to make the older civilizations be able to develop into the new ones, instead of making bronze age civs unintuitively balanced with e.g. medieval ones. For instance, the Mycenaeans could develop into either of the classical Greek civilizations, and those in turn could develop into the Byzantine empire.
  11. I am not quarreling. You made a claim, and I asked for sources, that's all. This is common procedure in projects that strive for historical accuracy (like 0 AD). Usually when someone makes a proposal for a change that relates to historical accuracy here, people ask for references. That is perfectly reasonable, as otherwise how can people know that the claim is substantiated? Consider for instance what happened to the Europa Barbarorum project. For years they added content to their mod based on the say-so of a team member who they trusted because he was a friend. That team member claimed to do primary research in an Irish monastery. When that person was asked for sources, he would tell that his research was too bleeding edge for there to be published sources, and other reasons. Eventually people caught up that he was inventing things wholecloth, and that him being a researcher in an Irish monastery was a lie. For a project to protect itself against such things (or against innocent misinformation), it is important to ask for sources. I am NOT saying that that is the case with you, note, I'm only mentioning the story to emphasize the relevance of sourcing.
  12. Academics discuss the nonexistence of things all the time, and in any case it should be perfectly possible to provide sources to at least corroborate what you just said on your second paragraph. "Go look it up on Perseus" is hardly proper sourcing, you didn't even say which entry there would contain the relevant information. In my opinion, since this is your suggestion, it's up to you to provide specific references, rather than asking others to invest hours in looking it up when asked for sources. I know this is a game forum, so academic rigor is not to be expected, but nevertheless references of some kind are still important, specially for suggestions that are supposed to improve historical accuracy. There's also the question of artistic license. Sometimes it's ok to have a bit of (intentional) historical inaccuracy (or exaggeration) if it makes a building or unit more interesting, or more recognizable.
  13. IMO that is a pretty radical change to make without any sources being provided. Would you care to provide any?
  14. Andrettin

    Render Dump

    There is some cool mech concept art in OpenGameArt.com which could be used for the design of such an easter egg unit for 0 AD, e.g.: https://opengameart.org/content/sci-fi-vehicles-collection
  15. This is true. It's something I've been considering for Wyrmsun, too. But doing pathfinder multithreaded is very difficult to do without either 1. losing determinism or 2. losing the performance improvements multithreading would provide. Losing determinism is not as big a deal for single player games, but for multiplayer ones it is essential, or else different players will end up with different game states. The UI could certainly be handled in a thread of its own, though (if it isn't already).
  • Create New...