Mythos_Ruler

teehee.... A shot from Atlas with all my graphics card settings set to "performance" (low quality). I see some mipping in the 3 farthest tanks, but what does one expect when the graphics settings on so low? (P-51 Mustang by me and Brightgalrs)

Is this okay? Not sure what you mean by "mipping." The textures look fine to me. The problem on your end may have been that the meshes were scaled too small. Dunno. I scaled them up to a realistic scale in the above is what I get (albeit, my graphics card settings were all on highest).

http://www.imgur.com <=== A most-excellent image host, I highly recommend.

Of course. That list isn't absolutely comprehensive, it's just a guide. We'll add more desired effects as we think of them.

That is one of my requested tech effects, so we'll see if they get enabled. They may not be on the current list though.EDIT: VisualActor is on the list, but generic and specific names are not. http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/TechModifications

How many times are people going to suggest this (almost) exact same feature? We have 1 or 2 team members that indulge the idea, but then the rest of the team shoots it down (for good reason, this would add unnecessary micro and feature creep). Sorry, just saying. I'm sensitive to the criticism that units shouldn't just switch back and forth from gathering to full-military gear. It's not very realistic, I agree. But forcing them to go drop off their resources, then re-arm, or whatever, is too much. Instead, I'd prefer something like they act like "villagers" when gathering... they run away when attacked... and don't fight back until tasked to do so by the player. Then they drop the resource (it is lost) and fight back. At any rate, I'd actually prefer that the current behavior remain what it is until we ship 0 A.D. Part 1. Then revisit the game's mechanics for 0 A.D. Part 2 (battalions, new combat paradigm, "call to arms", revamping the citizen-soldier concept as suggested here, etc.). As it is now, I think the way it works just plain works, and is a unique feature, and we should let the concept stand on its own for Part 1, then revisit it later when everything is up for revision. The way it works now just fits well with the overall scheme of the game, so I wouldn't want to change it unless we re-imagine the entire game. Just my opinion.

We didn't split them up because it would be "too complicated." We split them up because we realized that they are actually more interesting as separate factions. Spartans and Macedonians play differently from the very beginning of the game. In the original plan, you only got minor differences (different Champions and heroes) in the final settlement phase. Now, we can give them differences from the very first phase, with somewhat unique technologies and unit rosters from the start of the game. Age of Kings shipped with 13 factions, most of them very similar to each other. It was a very successful game and very fun to play. A large number of factions did not harm the game (in fact, enhanced it), and won't harm 0 A.D. In fact, if I had my way, we'd "ship" 0 A.D. Part 1 with 13 factions too (the current 10 + Thebans, Seleucids, and Prolemies).

I'd need to see it in action to get an idea of what is "wrong." Care to post the files in a zip? Just one tank won't hurt.

You are now using "Water colour" and "Water tint" differently than was originally intended, so now all the maps need adjusting. Originally, "Water colour" was just for non-fancy, non-reflective water. Now, it's what "Water tint" used to be for fancy water. Please, give a description of what these values do so I can better adjust all the maps.

If we worry about hosting it ourselves, it would be trivially easy to upload the images to an image host (http://www.imgur.com).

Indeed. The base model should be rigged first, before making variations.

The round roof looks Mogul to me, not Mauryan.

Almost every single one of the images posted so far are copyrighted by somebody.

The difference for me is 1 fps.

Where's that one reference Pureon used for the current placeholder houses? I think that was a pretty good reference.

Instead, make a local.cfg file in that folder and paste those parameters. Should not alter default.cfg as those are the defaults. Local.cfg will overwrite whatever settings you wish, but default.cfg will remain unchanged (as it should be).

Yes, we'll need an assortment of these for: Tights/Nothing (as it is now) Short skirt Medium (knee-length) skirt Long (ankle-length) skirt Pants Pants w/medium skirt Long skirt w/ sleeves (some priests) and maybe others that we may need (maybe Short skirt+skinny build for most archers, special pants or skirt styles for Mauryans). Good thing is though that once we have the base dude decided it should be relatively simple to edit it to suit our wishes.

Multiple archers per elephant is for the "Cavalry Archer" unit. The War Elephant is pretty much just for siege ability, unless we get passive attacks, then we can add an archer.

It'll be an archer in the cab, with the driver. It'll also have a "trample aura" once that's implemented, for a melee attack.

Nevermind the color of the reference. We'll have our own set of building textures.

The grass is already in the game. It's the "fancy" grass texture in Atlas, un der the "grass" terrain tab. It's achieved with a material and is highly expensive to render.

The "Champion" elephant unit, or War Elephant, is the Mauryan player's primary siege weapon. There needs to be a variation for this unit, and one or more for one or more of the Mauryan "hero" units (Chandragupta or Ashoka).

A parasol would be important to indicate a high-ranking person, such as the King: