Radagast.

awesome, trompetin made it happen: copy + paste of selected entities. he mentioned on IRC it's working even from one map to another (open Atlas twice). see the link in sander's post.

The new CC is fine. The fence's roof has changed. The rest I could easily throw in to the old one. The towers are high class. The upgrade idea is great though I should note that currently we can't upgrade the simulation part of the building (that means the building's range won't increase. It's no prob, I have a workaround which is more realistic as side-effect as no building really shoots arrow by itself. With the workaround the addition of the canons is easily possible thanks to Sander's late breakthrough with prop points / turrets) Each building will be upgradable once via a tech with upgrade arrow image for easy visual recognition. The tech will be available for a subset of the buildings (e.g. houses, tower, castle, fortress). In addition there will be smaller upgrades. The civic center is the only exception and will be upgradable three times instead of only once (changing the actor each time using Sander's incredible Actor change on tech research). The only new for the CC will be that it will change its look as per phase, making our ventures much more realistic. Thanks for the drawings. We will hopefully finish the Mod Configurator soon and then I'll be back at prop points + modeling.

Why should you only be able to capture enemies if you have a metropole (city phase)? The replacing citizen soldiers is up to you, as you have control of slaves like of your own units. The skills + ethnicity of the slaves prisoners of war will be held up, though they might bear tunics that identify them as slaves. I would even like to have them remain the player colors of all previous owners. (perhaps only the last owner is possible, i.e. by simply only adding multiplying a capturer-civilization-dependent slave tunic texture ontop of the previous texture.) Knowing the previous owner would make recapturing your lost units more attractive and more realistic. You would first free your units then others. Like in real life (if we are honest).

I have already started capturing (using unit power+health+proximity) as 0AD decided to add converting units + besieging buidings (using loyalty). I can't yet imagine how to make slaves tradable. If we made this, then we could immediately represent all resources in this way (object representation). Then only a more generic + visible inventory is missing and we have people bearing goods around. The newest prop point works of Sander will make a lot possible (e.g. people bearing each other, might look strange but possible. And as we have height range bonus for ranged units you even had a benefit from stacking your units... ). I think of making a unit that bears a wooden plank to building foundation defend itself with this plank if it has no better weapon at hand and is being attacked. So far the dreaming.

Don't we have those reptiles listed already? Crocodiles are in for sure, though they can't travel as far into the sea as they can in reality where they easily reach sand banks hundreds of kilometres into the open water. Which cat? Isn't a lion(ess) a cat too. The modern cat somehow is not yet that important. It might be added for the 0AD Fantasy Version or the Modern Epcoh Add-On pack. Or had the Romans cats like we know them?

I understand what you mean, though isn't that realism? In real life it's pretty hard to shoot someone in the testudo formation in 'cover mode'. The chance to do any damage might be close to zero for the back rows. If you want to do something against it, then do what you would do in reality: break the formation (in reality it'd be pretty hard for the soldiers in the formation to throw something at you when you approach, though I'm not sure if that's true for 0AD too).

I think I had this error too when I worked on the juggling joker. Unfortunately I forgot how I fixed it. fixed in latest millenniumad revision. I changed the actor + reexported .dae - material must be outside group element. - texture inside variantn thx for the storehouse

You are right, we definitely need the long hair, if we somehow made in a way that it's easy to distinguish the Lusitanians from the generic Iberians then this might well work.

Interesting insights. Thanks for the creation. I think we don't really need straight connection lines as interpolating those might be not really a true representation (because surely the units might die or be created in batches! thus it would be a very steep almost vertical line. thus interpolating would be misleading.). The points show all what is need and they are accurate. I see you have a better feel for colors than me. I picked blue for the highlight of the active tab but your grey + white looks like a good fit. I think it's another mod I will have permanently installed and will start with at all times. Thank you!

I thought you did no code design. It's yet another message I can't say how much this brings us forward. Now all our dreams can come true, we can define whole storylines. I never thought something like this could ever be a community project. I'm looking forward to script triggers for shieldwolf (as his assistant ) and also create storylines for historical and fantasy settings. A miracle, 0AD is a miracle. That makes sense + fits nicely with Sander's planned filestructure. The only addition would be the trigger-name but I wonder if a trigger not has type we somehow can figure out. It must be possible to determine what a trigger is for and thus we would not need the extra attribute name. In addition to that Flexible Missions look like they would extraordinarily well fit to Random Map Scripts. Instead of checking requirements, we could also add the requirements ourselves on the fly. (if scripts can place triggers and as it's being stored in map.XML I think they can.) The Missions would itself be built up of Sander's proposed helper building block scripts organized per category in the maps/scripts/ . Therefore we would also have a maps/missions/ folder. (not sure if we should separate the different types of mission templates Yves proposed, i.e. Generic+Flexible+Specific each in its own sub-folder, but probably yes.)

Oh, that's pretty funny. Ardworix, I not yet committed, because it appeared to me that it would remove 1/2 of the Iberian generic faction. I'm quite lost with that as I basically had the choice: I EITHER - recreate the files completely (absolutely redundant to the Iberian generic faction of 0AD). OR - figure out which of all the files in 0AD belong to the Iberian faction. The latter was what I did as far as I was able to on Sunday, changing the description and names to match your Lusitanian design document in the process. Strangely there were only few more changes to be made. Though I also changed the horses to be garrisonable by 2 soldiers but didn't test it yet. I will continue to look for Iberian files and rework those for the Lusitanian tonight. Though I wonder if you are aware of that the generic 0AD faction is mainly built up of Lusitanians it seems .

We somehow might find a way, though I'm not yet certain as of when and how the units should build it. Special would be that the mole was constructed horizontally chunk by piece probably. (yet each chunk could be raised like it is currently for building which rise from the ground) http://hubpages.com/hub/Alexander-the-Great-Spanks-the-City-of-Tyre I think, adapting the height map dynamically for freeing a mountain pass would be easier, though I don't know if marking impassable tiles as passable in general works. (impassable are e.g. those with a slope higher than xy degree or water tiles).

hm. as phases are techs anyway it will be possible. We had to think of a tech tree anyway at some point despite the transition to a new epoch really should be fluent and slow. This will be achieved by the artwork's timetag in the first place, though you still should have the chance to introduce such upgrade-all-techs-at-once special techs (to somewhat skip epochs as a cheat). The common way will be to research a techtree to reach that point manually and not simply by researching only one single tech to get all technology of a new epoch. I would love to have a timetag to guide the civilizations through history quite realistically, such that you only will fight stagnating cultures whenever those are very isolated + and there's really no innovation (we could introduce a tiny random chance that a civilization will not upgrade a common technology on time tag to achieve that effect.). In any case, your separation idea would fit nicely. As it would give the phases the purpose we needed to retain the functionality.

True due to the family being Macedonian successor. I just thought it had more effects like e.g. adding the capability to evolve into another faction just like Mythos did it for the Gallic + Britons or the Hellenes. It apparently has not this desired effect. So I wonder how this can be reached then?

Oh thanks for the note. Didn't know that it have to be three in all cases. Now this is becoming a hard nut. Perhaps someone knows some more Iberian heroes or some more leaders of the Lusitanians.

Ardworix and me we already started modeling the buildings. The XML will be committed today evening, so no need to worry. It will be a faction of the Iberians. We will overwrite the public/civs/iber.json to achieve that. The hero Viriato was moved to the Lusitanian faction in the process.

When the New Kingdom Egytpain faction of the 0AD BronzeAge-Addon-Pack Aristeia was created, no Ptolemies (also Egyptian, but later (Alex the Great successor state)) existed in 0AD main game. Now the logical conclusion would be to convert the New Kingdom Egyptians to a faction of the Egyptians. Unfortunately in 0AD the Ptolemies not are a faction of the 'Egyptian' civilization but are a standalone civilization. As a workaround I could live with this anomaly and would nevertheless make the New Kingdom Egyptians a faction of the Ptolemies, even though that may look a bit awkward. Any advice on how to best deal with it?

Is OnUpdate too much data then? Should we cache the time from the last data snapshot and then skip until the OnUpdate has been called often enough (summing up the msg.turnLength) that the set time interval (e.g. every minute, every second, ...) has passed? function ChartTracker() { this.settings = { dataGatherInterval_ms: DEFAULT_DATA_GATHER_INTERVAL; }; this.timeElapsedSinceLastDataAcquisition_ms = 0; } ChartTracker.prototype.OnUpdate = function(msg){ // Get player and range manager var cmpPlayerManager = Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_PlayerManager); var cmpRangeManager = Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_RangeManager); var numPlayers = cmpPlayerManager.GetNumPlayers(); var tickData = []; //fetch current time: var snapshotTime_ms = Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_Timer).GetTime(); // that should be 60, 120, 180, etc.. this.timeElapsedSinceLastDataAcquisition_ms += msg.turnLength; if (this.timeElapsedSinceLastDataAcquisition_ms < this.settings.dataGatherInterval_ms) { return; } // push the player data for (var i = 0; i < numPlayers; ++i) { var cmpPlayer = Engine.QueryInterface(cmpPlayerManager.GetPlayerByID(i), IID_Player); // Skip gaia if (i > 0) { tickData.push({ popCount: cmpPlayer.GetPopulationCount(), resCount: cmpPlayer.GetResourceCounts(), mapExplored: cmpRangeManager.GetPercentMapExplored(cmpPlayer.GetPlayerID()) }); } } this.chartData[snapshotTime_ms] = tickData; this.timeElapsedSinceLastDataAcquisition_ms = 0; // or use absolut timestamp in milliseconds instead if no variable overflow must be expected. }; Or should we register a Timer instead which calls agentx' function (which then had to be renamed from OnUpdate to sth. different)? (see agentx' answer) Oh, what does that mean? Will RegisterSystemComponentType handle this or must it be attached to an ingame entity or do you mean another entity, perhaps programming entity? Edit: to --> too.

Good idea, luckily agentx is already working on this + he's busy with heaps of new features so we should not put too much strain on him.

thanks, updated. Units on walls was a double of Entity on Entity (prop/turret) and should rather be walkable walls. reorganized + merged redundant entries

Let's call this a solid momentum. Here a concept for Viriathus, though that's too high for me and I had to ask colleagues of mine for help to sculpt this hero. Also I needed to care for the retopology. Though the heroes might get in last as they require huge attention. Viriathus: (hero) [source] The Lusitanians

Sorry, must have overlooked this topic previously. Decent research, as always. No idea if there are any people who knew how to really speak this language. The writing script also is not yet supported by the engine (sander + historic explained in another topic due to codepoint bytecount issues.). (you also mention the origin, thx for reposting in the other topic, I must have overlooked it)

I can't other than think of units in trees now. It's possible now and I still can't believe it. If we had transition animations then we could have climb animations when changing from moving to garrisoned (and th other way round).

True. Tough we can use ramps in the meantime, but it 's low priority now that we have entitities on entities.

It will also be useful for corralling/herding or to visualize how many units you have in your horse stables for example. As we now have prop/position More development awesoneness: