aeonios

Not the last time I checked. It was an idea being thrown around, something that probably ought to be done but which hasn't yet. I don't know if anyone is even working on it.

I think the most important thread to have is for networking, at least on multiplayer. Not having networking on a separate thread causes major problems including some notable disconnect issues.

No, physics should handle that. The pathfinder becomes extremely stupid when trying to calculate paths around other units. It gets stuck very easily and ends up causing huge traffic jams on some maps. Buildings/terrain/trees/etc are fine for pathfinding since they don't change much, but with units you don't really want it to worry about something that might have moved out of the way by the time it gets there. That just tends to give you really bad paths. Well there was that too. I know that it was very WIP last I checked on it, but I dunno how many people have had much motivation to work on anything when nobody even knows when stuff will start getting reviewed or merged again.

Correct, this could easily break sync. GPUs and CPUs alike have various quirks when it comes to floating point. The standard itself is broken. We've dealt with that CPU side already, but moving it to the GPU you'd probably lack libraries for ensuring floating point consistency. Correct. If you want to mess with the GPU you'd be better off doing real graphics instead. The current pathfinder is actually inefficient in a lot of ways, not the least of which in the way it handles collisions (which really shouldn't be part of the pathfinder at all). Apparently it also uses flood-fill in a lot of situations which is horribly inefficient. @wraitii has been working on some sort of complex multi-stage patch to fix all of those issues, but along with a lot of other things it got stalled by the halted development. From what I saw of it the pathfinder is also ridiculously complex.

Not to be a downer but 0ad is really not a good AI development platform. The current AI interface in 0ad is basically a horrible hack designed specifically to support petra, and petra is a nightmare of spaghetti code. If you're just looking to get into AI I'd suggest looking into Zero-K instead. It's much, much more friendly for AI dev and even has a very competitive AI dev community. I'm also kind of curious as to what you mean by "distribution functions". That's not an approach that I'm familiar with.

ReShade actually has a depth-based SMAA which would be a great reference for building a depth/normals based one, so I may end up doing that sooner than expected.

I didn't know that was a thing. If we could split grass into individual leaf pairs it would look a lot better in a lot of ways, since the current strip grass creates ugly strip shadows. This could be pretty epic. I'll see what I can do. The current patch doesn't need that much work. An issue I'm running into repeatedly now though is that the graphics options panel simply doesn't provide enough space to display all the options. I'm going to have to merge the water reflections and refractions options into one just to be able to fit the GLSL option back in, and then there still won't be room for the AA or texture filtering options. What's this presentation/conference about anyway?

>Why no AA I was working towards that months ago then the project came to a screeching halt because something something EUSSR totalitarian thought police laws. >Texture filtering That's not something I've given much thought to but it shouldn't be all that difficult to implement. I think it's just a minor draw option so it should be possible to enable it centrally. >Grass There is grass, but applying it to maps is a pain. There are some problems with grass, some artistic in nature and some due to performance. Eventually we'll have an openGL 3.3 option with drawinstanced which should take care of the majority of gfx performance issues. The art thing is actually more of a pain because if you place grass on the side of a hill part of it will be floating off the ground which just looks awful. Getting even grass coverage is another challenge, but fixing that requires first fixing the floating grass issue, because it makes shadows (and low angle cinematic shots) look bad and grass looks really bad without shadows.

eh? I have no idea when I'm going to be able to get any work done again. I honestly want to do a more sophisticated AA using depth and normals to detect edges more precisely and for less cost than MSAA. I dunno about ReShade I'll have to check that out to see how that works.

AO is a pain, and possibly expensive. There are filterable versions that are promising, but still a pain. I might play around with that eventually but the extended feature freeze has pretty much forced my work to a halt.

Sure, right next to the skeletons of the people who left them there. Random treasures are a weak way to balance a map though. You can't expect random treasures to supply the tens of thousands of wood that each player needs in order to compete reasonably.

Sand dune maps are so cool but so impractical from a gameplay standpoint. That said I'm not a huge fan of the orange sand, and it's a bit boring both from a texture standpoint and in terms of terrain. I think there should be random open/lowland areas that aren't covered in dunes. Maybe even oases. That would make it more interesting and also create an opportunity to add trees and things to the map to make it less resource poor. This too, although that's really easy to do.

Scaling for 3D models has to be done around a reference point. Since models aren't spheres they may have odd types of symmetry so a naive scaling algorithm is certain to fail. I'd suggest using a program specifically designed for working with 3D models to do the scaling with, like wings3D or blender. Those programs have better facilities for managing scaling to make it easier and to allow you to see what you're doing.

This sounds like a stance issue rather than an issue with unit ai. Also, not having units attack aggressive animals automatically would mean they'd always be stuck fighting lions and things 1v1 even if they have a bunch of friends nearby that should be helping them. That wouldn't be very smart. Probably stances should be split into range and behavior so that both can be controlled better. Also allowing users to set default stance settings for each unit would be good too.

Technically there was no Japan during that time period. The Japanese islands were at that time mostly inhabited by the ainu, who were progressively displaced by immigrants from mainland Asia. None of those people identified as being "Japanese" in any sense. Japan didn't even become a thing until almost 1600 AD. There wasn't really a Korea either, it was like 4 independent states back then without any sort of central cultural identity. They were distinct from China but they were not Korean. China did exist back then. The great emperor Qin Shi Huang united China in 220 BC. While his imperial line was extremely short and ended in 206 BC with only one heir making it to the throne, the imperial system he created lasted until 1912 with varying degrees of stability. Both the Qin dynasty and the Han dynasty occurred within the general time span of 0ad and would be appropriate to include, although the Han dynasty lasted much longer and is probably more characteristic of imperial China in general.