Stan`

To be fair it seems everything is under debate historically speaking

Yeah that's the idea. Bushes are less likely to look out of place

That's right. Maybe I should do that for A24 with the help of the team (I remember @elexis drafted a ticket for that) Wonder if that's a priority The question I'm asking is. Is adding new civs going in the right direction ? Adding more things to maintain and improve while we still have more than three missing wonders and probably a lot of other things to fix on the existing civs (none of which are documented anywhere other than spread over the forums)

Well yeah I don't really understand why we never created a folder for those civs (We have DE lol but that's another thing) Well thanks to them we have this wonderful game so I think it's fair to consider their feelings, don't you think ? We don't have to agree with them but we need to take them as part of the equation

What part of what @Nescio propose did you disagree with ?

Sounds like the reference calls for player color.

I'm thinking about it (Though they need to be finished first in any case) They will be in a separate mod called part II. You can just enable both I just need to check with the design document whether addind a gazillion factions is against the original founders idea of the game or not. Back on topic Shouldn't the generic name be hammer man or axeman ?

I'm gonna start with the obvious things first given that the error log is unfortunately empty... Did you make sure to use a lowercase extension ? (eg. 'dae' not 'DAE' or 'Dae') Did you in the actor XML file use an AO dependant material ? (eg. 'player_trans_ao.xml) In this case you need a second UVSet Does your mesh have multiple materials ?

@Bigtiger @LordGood feel like fixing those ?

Hmm... Sorry for the inconvenience ? LoL

Well there are two kind of moderators, the forum moderators (which are the team members with one or two exceptions) and the lobby moderators. This thread is for the latter. For the forums I'm afraid I can't be here 24/7 and that's time I'd rather spend doing something more useful. If people do want to help us flagging posts and or thread does help as we get emails for those.

Well a lot of people are able to play else Couldn't have taken place however we do know there is lag when many units are moving and @wraitii is doing is best. The game is indeed slower in multiplayer than in single player to account for network lag. Sorry for the inconvenience. It's not an excuse but unlike GTAV we don',t have a 295 Million budgets. Rather a 10 000th of that

Unfortunately yes the IA has a huge impact on the game speed (Even one bot) that might change in the future but currently that's still the case. Things that can help are playing on smaller maps with limited population. The end game lag you are encountering is due to the pathfinder and will get better as @wraitiiimproves it in upcoming version. Indeed you are able to rejoin an AI game however starting at that moment the game will be different between the player that rejoined and the others as his AI will start to do different things. (Each computer computes the whole game and the AI is not deterministic.) Are you playing in WiFi or in Ethernet ?

Well he reverted to A23b so it is Yeah makes sense. I'll probably buy a RPI4 or a Jetson so we can test on those platforms before the end of the year.

Maybe @Imarok and @elexis have a bigger understanding and can elaborate on this. There have been a few discussions about it already though.

@Itms He wanted to play A23 too any way to fix his sm38 bug ? He will also need to update to SVN again.

Well the main problem is how do you make the difference between A crash A disconnection Alt + F4 The user shutting down the computer From the player (who is not the host) all are the same the game ends and all is over the host cannot rejoin anyway while the player would have been able to. Enforcing hosts to have a good quality broadband is nice but not really feasible. Currently the only solution is to either host game when you don't trust the players, play only with players you trust or don't do rated games. The best solution IMHO would be to have some kind of hotseat where the game switches host to the last player online. Another would be to require all rated matches to be hosted with wfg which reauires a lot of resources aside from making a headless server. You cannot also just trust the player sending you the result of the match (Else it would be easy to fake wins (just send a few dozen of matches wins) Also keep in mind the lobby is just for matchmaking it will just tell you the game is running it can't really tell who's winning.

It did have hair on the sides though

It did have hair on the sides though and those weird protuberances.

You'll need the other details for it to be credible. Gorgona without snakes... Meh

For some reason feels more Japanese than greek to me. Do you have the reference ?

That would be for part 2 but you can make thm for DE

From cyangmou Might be of inspiration

Sure

You need to add either <ResourceGatherer disable="" /> to your unit or remove in template_unit.xml