aeonios

Heh. Those are great but things like being able to set what territory classes a structure will decay in seem more important, or making damage bonuses something sane rather than "meleeCavalryBonus".

Geh. I was afraid of that. I guess that's just one more thing to add to my unholy pile of work to do.

I'm trying to create an aoe style villager type unit that is randomly spawned male or female and it should use the appropriate response sounds for its gender. Is there any way to do this?

One thing I quickly noticed when reviewing the existing civs was that a lot of our civs have extremely thin unit rosters. Like sele, which has exactly 3 infantry units and 2 cavalry. How are you supposed to create an RPS balance system with only 5 units, most of which aren't even counters to each other? Some civs are ok but for a lot them there's just not enough there to work with.

I'm working on a mod that overhauls game mechanics. Hard counters and role-based balance are a major part of that.

AFAIK the game is not threaded in any way. Sim and rendering and the netclient all run on one thread. There are plans to move the net client to a separate thread but that hasn't been done yet. Rendering and sim are tightly interdependent so it probably wouldn't do much good to run them on separate threads. I do have plans to try to reduce the CPU-side costs of rendering, but it'll be a while before I make any real progress on it. Keep in mind that intel graphics steals memory from main memory so it wouldn't be strange to have different/weird CPU usage patterns from it, not to mention it'd use a totally different driver.

That's irrelevant, because you don't get to know the result of a painter anyway. If you want to do something like painting by height/slope you can of course do that in a separate step, but that has nothing to do with the interface to the painters.

No, the createArea functions take an array of painters as an argument, and applies all of them successively in order.

IMO it's bad not to have defaults because that makes it more difficult for designers to figure out what kind of values are sane, not to mention javascript crashes are nasty. If javascript fails on the same error twice in a row, atlas will crash. I'm not sure why that happens but it's bad.

I think the timeout on mapgen workaround still has yet to be committed as well. There shouldn't be too many more commits before release though.

Christopher Alexander, The Nature of Order series. It should be required reading for anyone who is even thinking about touching anything art or design related.

Sure. Territory in 0ad is pretty cool, although I think eco buildings should be untied from it. The fact that you can't spam towers in the enemy base is probably better than in aok. Tower rushes were super lame in that game. The fact that you can hunt with cav rather than having to herd animals to your CC is definitely an improvement. Herding was freaking lame. Relics were also lame. 0ad's barter system is definitely an improvement over aok. There are lots of things we do better. There are a few important things that we do worse though. 0ad's buildings are virtually unkillable until city, which is lame. Towers were fairly strong in aok but they could be killed by a mob of infantry. Walls of houses are also freaking lame. Citizen soldiers are a disaster that ties eco to combat units and makes unit choices heavily eco bound. The fact that the vast majority of combat units come from the barracks for most civs is also bad because it means there are fewer meaningful decisions, and this is compounded by citizen soldiers since civs that have, say, a separate building for producing infantry and cav are extra limited by the eco limitations of cav. It also limits combat in the early game since any use of combat units for actual combat sacrifices eco. Rushes tend to be limited to top players because of this. Basically unless your rush is really, really effective in suppressing your enemy's eco it's practically suicide and most people aren't willing to take such a high risk. It's also a major nerf to mercs, which I don't think are even as strong relatively as aok's t2 units. The fact that women don't add arrows to CCs, towers, etc, is also lame. If you accidentally garrison them in an arrow-shooting building they're worse than useless since they prevent units that do add arrows from garrisoning. The fact that fortresses can't be built in neutral is also lame, since unlike towers forward fortresses were a very interesting and useful strategic move in late game aok. AOK had stronger unit counters. It mattered a whole lot more what units you decided to build. In 0ad it feels a whole lot like spamming random units (or just spamming everything except maybe pikemen) is the way to go. I don't necessarily like the unit counter arrangements in aok entirely, but in general it was more interesting than what we have. We don't have any riot units. AOK had tactical catapults (mangonel, onager) that were only mediocre vs buildings but which could splat enemy armies into mashed potatoes. They were also very vulnerable to being killed, which made for interesting exchanges. No, cowardice is refusing to compare your game to a similar game which you know to be better. Just because it was a good game does not mean that it can't be improved upon, and if you aren't willing to address the weaknesses of your own game then you will never improve upon them, either. What you've said is like saying "oh I shouldn't bother learning to play piano beyond chopsticks because mozart was so great that I'll never be as good as him". If everyone took that attitude there would be no musicians, no artists, and no great games in the first place. Why make aok when chess is obviously such a great game?

Eh maybe. After watching aok games on youtube I'm starting to think that 0ad's gameplay is crap though. Certainly some things are better, but overall I have to say that 0ad is definitely inferior.

This ain't a democracy bro. If you make changes to gameplay it should be to improve the gameplay according to a clear vision of how it ought to be. If you don't have the guts to take such a risk then you can't be a gameplay designer. Trying to make a game by mob rule will always produce garbage. I've been there, and it's not pretty.

https://github.com/Pyrophorus/YAMG/blob/master/yamg/maps/random/yamg/fractal.js#L82 mapSize should be g_Map.size I think. https://github.com/Pyrophorus/YAMG/blob/master/yamg/maps/random/yamg/fractal.js#L184 if you put nochiasm in the paint function the user cannot set it, since paint is usually called by a library function which does not know about it. It needs to be an instance variable and to be set in the constructor.

There is literally nothing that I can do about that.

That's not a problem and I can't fix it. Try placing a tower and it should be more obvious. Or try looking at your own shadow under any light.

I think the main reason people play mainland is because it's an open map that isn't wood deficient. Build order doesn't really differ that much on heavily choked maps, but scouting is much more difficult. This is something I found out playing on the alpine map and the ardennes map that I made. People still do play on other maps like frontier, just not as often because it's easier just to set mainland for the above mentioned reasons, and since everyone is familiar with it. That's also why I've tried to make my maps super pretty, to lure people into playing them.

Eh, high contrast/saturation colors are objectively bad. The bright yellow on top of gaul buildings is bad, the ridiculously bright green grasses on a lot of map textures are bad, etc. When people mention that mainland is ugly now, that's what they mean by it. Also more distinction between gaul and brits would be cool. I think somewhat brighter colors work well for brits but not so much for gauls.

Alright try this: model_common.fs terrain_common.fs

Did you add the new files I posted above? Also don't take screenshots with the freaking settings window open, I can't see what's even going on.

Yes, that's what it's supposed to look like. I see that the issue with black artifacts is gone also. Newer cards seem to dislike having 0 as an input to the power function.

It's supposed to be blurry. If it looks wrong post a screenshot.

I think I figured out how to fix the shadow artifacts, probably. Try this: model_common.fs terrain_common.fs

Yeah sure. dof_hdr.fs