feneur

Oh, I've only been the Project Leader since October... 2008 =) But I don't think we made any big announcement about it or something, and I don't expect you to keep checking our sigs every now and then, so it's not like I can't understand how you missed it

There have been some suggestions as to what civilizations will be in part two, but nothing is decided, and probably won't be for another couple of years. After all, the team is likely to be very different then, so if nothing else it should be up to the people on the team at that point to make the final decision about what they want to do with part two.

What's stopping you? All you need is an idea and some time, and some motivation to keep you going is of course a positive thing as well

Ah, true. Good.

Please see http://www.wildfiregames.com/0ad/page.php?p=12831 for more info on how to get involved in this project. Due to the complexity of a project like this (0 A.D. is a standalone game btw, not a mod) it's really recommended that you have some earlier experience though.

I personally believe there could be more problems with having animals spawn every now and then. I mean all users have the chance to find the animals. And in any case I doubt that all the animals will run in the same direction = it will take so much time/units to get all to one place that it wouldn't be worth it. In other words, I think there are areas which will take some time to get balanced, but I don't think this is one of them

Hmm, no you'll not need to build the game yourself to use the new simulation system. You just have to use the command -sim2 when running the game.

Welcome to the forums! I'm sure the programmers will have lots of tips for where to start. Hope you'll enjoy being a part of the community

That's the idea

It's possible to do by changing the member group from Community Users to Community Members I've made the change for remaxim now if you want to send a PM Matt (or if you want to send a PM remaxim ).

As you might notice the article that mentions Unconventional weapons is one of our History articles and not an article on the game itself. Thus I don't see any reason to mention it in the FAQ.

I can't say I understand all of that, but from what I understand I have to agree with you Philip. No wonder there are buggy programs when these kinds of attitudes are so common

Hmm, I'm not even sure we still use PMD since we've started to use COLLADA, I'm not too sure about all the technical things though, so perhaps I'm wrong. If we're still using it I think it's only internal to Pyrogenesis and automatically exported once the game loads the file. I hope someone else has got more info on it though, and I'm sure there are places in the documentation that could use some updating in either case. EDIT: Doh, Philip answered before I did :) And he said things more eloquently and all as well Not too surprising though as he's the one with the technical knowledge.

You've been making great progress these last couple of weeks (and before as well, it's just more visible/easy to understand now ). Keep it up, and hopefully we'll get more people on board to help you (you're a great inspiration, so it would be surprising if other programmers wouldn't be motivated )

The game supports some basic random map scripting already. I don't have any experience with AoMs RMS scripting so I can't say anything about any possible differences/similarities, but with some ideas we plan to implement I believe it will be better.

Nice Good luck with both your present project and the future one

Sounds great And while I don't have a lot of experience as to the exact options I believe there are ways to make money/protect your content even if you use a GPL licensed engine for your game. If nothing else there are examples of companies making the game free, but selling special content (commercial games for that matter, and not using a GPL engine). Not saying you have to choose Pyrogenesis, but just want to make sure you get a better idea of your options if you do.

I'm sorry you didn't get a proper answer. The only reason I can think of that might have lead me to not respond would be that you'd seemed like someone who was making a commercial offer, but I doubt that so I can only say I'm sorry. Generally I'd say that one or two tracks is not enough as we'd like to have a greater consistency between tracks which is hard if too many people are involved. On the other hand one more track is one track closer to having all finished, so it would be stupid of us to say no if your offer is good enough. What I mean by that is, do you think you'd be prepared/able to create something that is similar in style to the music that already exists for the game? (Some of which might be found on http://www.wildfiregames.com/0ad/page.php?p=1495 )

But you do have the other files in the \0ad\logs folder? What operating system are you using? Have you run the game? I mean it's not created otherwise. (Just trying to remove the easy causes before Jan or Philip has time to answer )

1. So that potential developers can see what the game is like and find out if it's something they'd like to contribute to. And actually, as long as one don't break any laws or violate the GPL we don't really care who downloads it or what they do. However don't recommend non-programmers to download it yet as it's not too much fun if you're not both ready to do some (relatively) complicated things to get it working and be prepared that a lot of things aren't yet working. 2. By posting in the forums (so we know that there are people out there who want to play the game, it's a good help to motivate us and you might have some good insight or be fun to talk to in general which is also a good thing, so it doesn't get too lonely in the forums), talking about 0 A.D. to people you think might have the necessary skills to help develop the game, and also spreading the word about the game in general. 3. 4. It's very much ok, as long as you have something relevant to say it's great. 5. You can't, just post a message to say you want it deleted and a moderator will delete it. The main reason we haven't updated the FAQ now (it really should have been updated much earlier so it's not an excuse, just an explanation) is that we're redesigning the website. The new website will probably not be out for some months yet, but it's still soon enough for us not to want to spend too much time on the old site. A lot of questions/answers in the present FAQ are still valid, and a lot of questions aren't easier to answer now than then. Questions about dates/system specs will not be possible to answer until very soon before they're due. Posting a link to the FAQ in the forums might be a good idea, thanks But I'd say the FAQ is reasonably easy to find on the website, perhaps we could post a direct link to it in the menu as well, but since some parts are not up-to-date I'm not sure how useful that would be.

Am not sure what's going on. Checked out SVN trunk again to be sure I started from the beginning. Am not getting any crashes or errors when running the precompiled pyrogenesis.exe. Atlas crashes, but doesn't display any errors. Am currently building to see if running in VC++ will show any error messages. In any case, it doesn't seem to be exactly the same thing as Dino reports, but as strange as it seems it could just as well be the same

Dino, I'm about to start a bug report (will probably have it posted before you are online again, but wanted to make it known what I'm up to... ) on Trac where you can post your details as well. I'll post the link here when it's up. I'm just doing a new checkout to be sure I don't have any leftover problems from an earlier checkout/something gone wrong in an update/when building/etc.

The simulation system is already in SVN, and it's possible to use the new system rather than the old by using a command line switch. -sim2 Please be aware that it's not as developed as the old one yet, so only basic things work at the moment. Philip is constantly improving it though and is happy for others to help, so it should only be temporary.

I'm not sure how high priority it is to fix this though, since it's likely to either not continue be an issue with the new simulation system or even be due to some change which has occurred in the rewriting process. I doubt it's the latter though as Philip has been keeping the new system separate so we don't loose any functionality in the mean time

Have tried and can duplicate the problem. Turns out I haven't tested to actually kill enemy units in a while, only the economical part of the game, that's why I hadn't noticed it before so I don't know for how long it's been an issue.