Itms

It wouldn't be logical to use the minimap if the alert is raised by a specific entity (and I think we shouldn't change that).

Thanks for your ideas and points of view ! sanderd : Challenge accepted ! First I'll replace the hardcoded stuff. Replying to the last posts, it seems that the problem is all about micromanagement and choice of garrisoning units. What about using the UnitAI stances (for non programmers, the buttons at the left bottom of the unit's portrait : agressive, passive, standground etc.) ?

My current implementation works with a finite radius around the bell, actually =) What about the number of levels, LordGood ? The idea about defence towers is good, btw !

Hello everyone ! I am currently working on the "town bell" behaviour, which we shall call "alert" as bells aren't appropriate for this historic period. When I began the work, some threads on the forum made me think of a system with two alert levels, ie. a 'normal alert' mode where female citizens, unable to defend, would be garrisoned, and a 'red alert' mode where every unit is garrisoned. In the red mode, war units could for instance increase the attack of the building in which they garrison (I have not yet implemented this idea, I am waiting for the replies in this topic.) Nonetheless, many people didn't see the interest of such a system, and would rather have a on/off switch system. I open this topic to discuss this. Tell me what do you think of the feature, and in the case you want a on/off system, what 'level of alert' do you want (only female, or every unit, or in between). All ideas are welcome ! The patch I have written so far is here : http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/2154 I also need artwork for the buttons, please visit this topic : http://www.wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=17703 Thanks !

The explanation of the three levels is in the patch description I linked in the first post. Please discuss the behaviour of the feature there on the trac, this topic is only aimed at designing ui elements. =)

Thanks !

I disabled this behaviour on purpose. The only interesting situation is when units are garrisoned to resist an attack, so the behaviour "unload+back to work" is only implemented in town bell : http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/2154

Hi everyone. I am posting a patch implementing the Town Bell : http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/2154 To replace the ugliest icons ever made by a programmer testing his patch, I'd need the artwork team to design a simple set of icons figuring a bell, a bell for red alert, and a bell for end of alert. That's what I work with in my tests : It would also be interesting to have a sound corresponding to these three levels, or at least a bell sound. Thanks to all the artwork team !

I haven't yet been on the channel, unfortunately... Now that I really work on the game, I should take the habit to connect me as often as I can !

I've thought of it ! But it is not really linked to this patch, since here we're just trying to handle the citizen soldiers who can both fight and work. I open a Trac ticket to propose the feature. Concerning the topic itself, did you manage to get my patch working ?

I uploaded another version of the patch : http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/799#comment:17 mimo had been able to make it function, does anyone experience the same problem as sanderd17 ?

I always use the last SVN revision (for programming), at this time r13890

1) We are actually translating a custom Gallaecio version which allows him making more consistent his work on the internationalization system (he shall typically use our translations to test whether it is working and creates no problem on screen) I translated the paragraph from gui/manual/intro.txt this morning, so I think it is not missing in Transiflex ! 2) It surely does imply a compilation, but I didn't intent to do it, I let Gallaecio work on it (he shall explain us how to do when it's ready) ------------- --> PM !

Hello everyone, I've written a patch to fix this ticket : http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/799. It works very well for me, but apparently sanderd17 has not succeeded getting it working. Thus, I create this topic to draw attention on my patch : does anybody manage to use this functionnality ? Itms PS. BTW, I have a few patches waiting for review (http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/1773 and http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/2116) but you can figure out there is no hurry, this is not high-priority work.

Plop, hadn't seen this topic, that way we can meet properly =) If you want to contact me to work together on the translation, feel free ! Plop, pas vu le topic, mais comme ça on peut se présenter =) Si tu veux me contacter pour harmoniser nos traductions, n'hésite pas ! PS : Par curiosité, d'où viens-tu ? Tu vis en France actuellement ?

It just happened to me while playing on Azure Coast 3 against bots. Unfortunately I played with a modified version of 13871 (patched with #799) so the command file might contain a reference to my own commands. I post my data though. crashlog.txt commands.txt

Indeed, the ones who posted on the topic mentioned seem to disagree totally with my vision. If anyone shares my opinion, please participate to the discussion ! Otherwise, I shall abandon the idea.

I don't know if it's really weird to choose the mod from the pregame GUI of pyrogenesis : for sure it would likely need a full reload, but this is already what happens with Atlas... By the way, it is how modding works in Civilization IV.

Thanks, I hope above all I don't make too many silly mistakes (to understand and also express myself) when I communicate with members of the team in English...

I knew someone was going to answer that ! My aim was to make more consistent the general "treasures must be collected only by the player himsellf"-idea by disabling the automatic gathering behaviour in the case of treasures.

I don't understand : what I'm proposing is not a new feature ! It is just disabling automatic gathering of the treasures, to force the player to spend time to explore the map and take the treasures with his units.

This is indeed an interesting idea ! I was just thinking of an agressive animal put by the map designer near the treasure, actually. But do you agree with my thoughts about treasure collecting convenience ?

I agree you can choose treasure hunters units to gather them. Nonetheless, you should order them to do so, especially when the treasure is protected by a Gaia structure to destroy, or a Gaia creature to defeat. It's indeed convenient (as far as the tresure is not protected as I said) but too convenient : collecting treasures should cost time to the player as it gaves him a bonus against his enemies.

I start this topic because my idea has been refused on Trac (ticket #2136) and I think it's worth a discussion. When workers gather resources, they have a behaviour which permits them using other supply that the one the player indicated (e.g. when this supply is entirely used). Unfortunately, this behaviour also appears when gathering a treasure ; and I think it shouldn't because a treasure needs to be indicated by the player. It seems strange to me when my unit, after collecting a treasure, notices another one and takes it. (It happens often on Acropolis, where several treasures are placed at the center of the map.) Even if a treasure is considered in the code as a type of resource, I don't think it should in the gameplay : for instance you wouldn't assign workers to treasures as you do with meat or wood. Do you agree ?

Thanks Sander, I hadn't understand that I don't have to be a part of the team to submit patches. I submit my first patch immediately ! http://trac.wildfire...com/ticket/2116