feneur

This is starting to look really sweet And while it may not be an exact representation of the actual path a unit will take, it's sure going to be helpful to have a general idea. Maybe you might want to change the point slightly if it goes too close to an enemy, or if it's for say a barracks where you're going to have units come out and go to the rally point for a long time you may want to cut down some trees which are in the way to make them go faster or something. Nice to have you post all this as well, really helps us to get an idea of what you're doing and all-in-all it's very interesting to follow. (Hope more people will follow your example )

Yeah, it will do more than gather treasures, it's just to give it some purpose until trade is implemented

Probably not cycling between the two, the benefits aren't likely to outweigh the time it would take to implement/the complexity it would add, but you can make maps that are either night/day or any time in-between =)

Untextured is to be expected as the textures aren't pregenerated in the SVN version. That should only be for a few seconds while the textures are being generated though, so probably not too relevant in this specific case. Just something to be aware of in general Hanging isn't to be expected though, so there sure seems to be a bug somewhere. I hope the programmers will be able to help you debug it, and if it's something we can fix, fix it.

Generally I agree. I think Outposts should add somewhat to the territory though. Perhaps they should be possible to build on unclaimed land, only have a small territory effect (far smaller than their LOS, though having a limit on how close to the outpost the border could go), and not suffer any hitpoint/capture effects if surrounded by enemy territory. That way they would contribute to your LOS/scouting, and give you the ability to protect e.g. a mill at a metal mine even if it's a fair distance away from the Civic Center, but without making the territory in general ridiculously large or something.

Fighting in formations isn't implemented yet. And yeah, stances can probably take some more work before they're finished

I don't know all the intricate details etc, but my guess is that the results are what is displayed when you press the F11 key, that does bring up profiler info in either case. (Shift+F11 to save current profiler data to "logs/profile.txt")

C++ is probably not a good place to start if you've never used it before, especially since game programming, and especially as large a project as 0 A.D. JavaScript (which hasn't got anything in common with Java apart from the name) is probably a better choice though. I'm not a programmer, so I don't know where to start, but if you've never programmed at all it's probably a good idea to start at the very beginning and learn the basics. Be prepared that it will take a lot of time to get to the point where you can contribute if you've never programmed in any language at all though.

In an Alpha yeah =) It depends on how many programmers are active and what they work on exactly when it will be though.

It's probably easier to use the Delete key on your keyboard than the button. Eventually the dialog should support the use of the enter key as well, so it should be really fast. Just select the building, then press the delete key followed by the enter key For now you can at least speed it up slightly by using the keyboard though.

Units on ships isn't really implemented yet, it's currently just using the same code as building garrisoning. Which of course isn't perfect, but better than not being able to play island maps at all

Do we need anyone but fishing boats to be able to fish? Not that fishing from the shore is a bad idea/unhistorical afaik, but at least for now that should get rid of at least that part of the problem. If they can't gather the fish I mean.

(Unique names would mean one more thing to have to allocate space for in the GUI. Just something to think about )

Ah, no. Hopefully we will not be for a long time either so I'll gladly archive that part (I also de-spoilerified the sound designer part )

Apart from the glitches that's definitely a good idea

Took some time today to play the game, and it sure feels promising There's something satisfying about expanding your borders on the expense of your enemies

Agreed (And I'll really have to check out the current version in-game, will have to do that tomorrow as I'm not working then but now it's almost midnight so too late today )

Hmm, now you're onto something (Though please, please, please can we have gates in the palisades? I always found the lack of that a bit silly in AoK.)

No need to build it yourself, there is a Windows binary included in SVN Though sometimes it might be a short while between new code changes and the autobuilt binary is updated so at times it might be useful to be able to Generally the autobuilt one should work fine though.

Just want to mention that there's already been some changes to the code in SVN that makes the game quite a bit faster, and there's potentially a bit more on the way, so hopefully Alpha 7 will perform better on your computers

Yeah, I guess that mostly was what I meant Curtain wall. I would still like freely placed walls to be implemented though, for non-territory gameplay if nothing else. It would feel a bit less than fun not to be able to block off places though, but on the other hand there will still be outposts and fortresses to fill that role. (It will make the game less defensive-oriented as well, though I'd personally want to have at least the possibility to play defensively But for those who want it to be less like that

Hmm, I think you just made an argument for the city walls rather than freely buildable walls in this scenario Not sure Walls should affect the borders at all, after all, weren't walls often built on borders? =) (Borders of cities more commonly than borders of territories afaik, but still ) All-in-all I think I'm starting to lean towards dynamic borders. Just played EE2 the other day to remember a bit more how their territories work and feel, and remembered it feels a bit static. I mean once the initial race to capture as many territories as you can you really need to start a war to expand. Eventually things must come to war (unless there is a game mode which allows for other victory conditions, but I'm talking about general Conquest games ) but it's nice to have some other options for expansion. Especially if you're already at war with another player and want to finish that war before taking on the next. Also, for the people not liking limits, there should/will be a mode without territories and other limits so everyone should have their choice. However the main focus will be the territory-based mode as we think that makes the game more interesting.

We're in the process of deciding that Feel free to add your opinion. I'm not sure which way I'd prefer to go, both ways have their good sides. Would it be possible to have quick mockups of both versions in the game some time soon Philip? With some quick way to choose either. Would be nice to be able to play a couple of games with either type to get a feel for them.

Thanks for working to keep the server running Matt A few hickups when things are upgraded are but to be expected

Cool I was just making sure we keep our priorities straight. Ah, that would work.