Leaderboard

Empires Ascendant is poetic English, but perfectly acceptable.

I believe it's meant to happen in multiple threads, but as developing is easier in a single thread (you can e.g. profile the time the pathfinder needs), it's left this way. If you think you can help out, I invite you to the #0ad-dev IRC channel on quakenet. Philip is working on the pathfinder, and you can always find him there online (though he isn't always active).

Hi there, it should be very easy to calculate several paths in parallel - but some functions used by Compute(Short)Path and themself use this PROFILE stuff which can be used only by the main thread. If that will get fixed it should be that easy (you need to add '-fopenmp' to LIBS/C(XX)FLAGS): Index: source/simulation2/components/CCmpPathfinder.cpp===================================================================--- source/simulation2/components/CCmpPathfinder.cpp (revision 14386)+++ source/simulation2/components/CCmpPathfinder.cpp (working copy)@@ -576,6 +578,7 @@ void CCmpPathfinder::ProcessLongRequests(const std::vector<AsyncLongPathRequest>& longRequests) {+ #pragma omp parallel for for (size_t i = 0; i < longRequests.size(); ++i) { const AsyncLongPathRequest& req = longRequests[i];@@ -582,12 +585,16 @@ Path path; ComputePath(req.x0, req.z0, req.goal, req.passClass, req.costClass, path); CMessagePathResult msg(req.ticket, path);- GetSimContext().GetComponentManager().PostMessage(req.notify, msg);+ #pragma omp critical+ {+ GetSimContext().GetComponentManager().PostMessage(req.notify, msg);+ } } } void CCmpPathfinder::ProcessShortRequests(const std::vector<AsyncShortPathRequest>& shortRequests) {+ #pragma omp parallel for for (size_t i = 0; i < shortRequests.size(); ++i) { const AsyncShortPathRequest& req = shortRequests[i];@@ -595,7 +602,10 @@ ControlGroupMovementObstructionFilter filter(req.avoidMovingUnits, req.group); ComputeShortPath(filter, req.x0, req.z0, req.r, req.range, req.goal, req.passClass, path); CMessagePathResult msg(req.ticket, path);- GetSimContext().GetComponentManager().PostMessage(req.notify, msg);+ #pragma omp critical+ {+ GetSimContext().GetComponentManager().PostMessage(req.notify, msg);+ } } }

When they gain experience, they upgrade so they can use flaming projectiles.

Nice but is it not better looking with the player colors on both ends and not in the middle

Darklord, thanks for your feedback. Certainly 'Empires Ascendant' sounds epic and poetic. Also, I have to say that it doesn't sounds 'Spanish', Spanish is my mother tongue, and 'Empires Ascendant' it's pretty far from Spanish linguistic structures. Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Now with 100% more better. (props are custom-made, though separate if we wanted to reuse them (they do use the boat's texture file though), used the nubian archer for the kicks).

An updated list: Civ bonus: Longboat is a mobile dropsite. Start with additional wood, but less food. Some units do heal themselves. Team bonus: ? Unique technologies: Colonization of foreign soil (Player receives additional loot). Clinker construction (Improves naval speed)

Latest ship iteration (changed the textures ever so slightly, made the boats a little longer). Still no animations as I can't really animate the dude without IK. Model is currently still mauryan but that can be changed easily.

In [MOD]/simulation/data/technologies, you have the files where the technologies are defined. Per technology, you can add a different sound under the "SoundComplete" name. The sound has to be defined in [MOD]/audio as an xml file to handle certain variations of the sound.

Would it be feasible to group the behaviours into various traits or some such? Different traits are more or less prevalent (controlled via scale or per cent etc) depending on the personality. Adjust the scales of traits and you have a large number of personalities. You could do behaviours directly instead of grouping them for more control but I would imagine the work creating each personality would be more work that way? Edit: didn't see fenuer's post. Already been said, my bad

Here's a split of Age of Empires Online vs 0 A.D. to help compare and contrast:

I'm definitely for giving each ruler a different playing style. And I think it's a very good idea to think about (and collect) taunts, traits and tactics that fit these personalities. Please don't get me wrong on that. It's just that I think that actually implementing all these (slightly) different AI's might be something that could wait. But that shouldn't stop people from making some 'sketches'. Every faction would need some rulers with particular styles (like expansionist, raider, turtler and balanced) and the others could be slight variations on these with preferences for certain unit types/technologies.

Hi Team, I have the first draft for battle sounds ready: Please check it and share your feedback. If everybody like it, I will split the sequence to make it interactive. I decide to upload it to youtube because it seems easier for everybody, any suggestion is welcome. If somebody is curious about the workflow and sources, drop me a message!