feneur

For now it would probably more or less just be useful for testing to find out if you've defined something yourself (so you know it works the way you want it to) or if it just is carried over from the default. It could also be useful for total conversion type mods, but in that case it's probably more likely that it will be distributed as a game of its own anyway and then it can just as well be removed completely. (Assuming the game doesn't run amok if the public mod isn't available?)

I'm talking about the public mod Which at least as far as I can tell is loaded without being explicitly included among the mods to be loaded

Is there a way to disable an entire mod yet? Or will we need something more advanced for that?

I think that would add more issues than it would be an improvement, how would you communicate to a player that he can't place a Civic Center somewhere because it's in another player's territory if the territory isn't shown?

binaries\data\mods\public\art\meshes\skeletal though the main model is only in PMD, there is a DAE for heroes though that might be useful.

That sounds as if you haven't recompiled since the above was added/need to wait for an autobuild. I could be wrong, but it sounds like that kind of an error

It's in this very thread you're replying to So no need to look too far =)

Maybe you should stop viewing the forum on your phone Nah, don't worry, but please do be a bit more careful

Then try

If any of the people in the conversation replies, everyone in the conversation will be able to read it. There's no need to install any additional software.

You should be able to do this already Just enter more than one username (separated by commas I believe) in the "Recipient's Name" textbox and it will be sent to everyone There's also a handy function which shows you which of the recipients have read it and when, so in that regard it's better than using a forum thread. As for preventing spammers: We're only allowing PM permissions to members who have already posted five or more ordinary forum posts, and so far that has proved enough to prevent PM spam. (We did have one or two occasions of PM spam before that, which we thankfully were able to catch and remove before most people had a chance to read, so we were at least able to limit their reach.) We don't want to restrict things more than necessary as that would cause limitations for ordinary users as well

Ooh, nice idea

That actually reminds me about the original plan for the farmstead/food gathering: To have the farmstead come with something like 6 plots of land around it (only those which would fit on the map would actually be placed), and then on that plot of land you would have been able to place either a farm field, an orchard or a corral. And only there. If we'd went with that way we'd not have had to try and do all these things to get around people placing farms wherever etc =) But I guess there are other benefits to doing it the more flexible way (Though the "hierarchy" of fields etc being tied to a farmstead is kind of a nice concept, at least in theory )

Primary purpose is not the same as only purpose

+1 This sounds best to me, especially since I would imagine it might be difficult to build walls in some places without being able to place short walls reliably, but it would be good to avoid allowing players to place wall towers almost right next to each other.

Afaik that is the case already on some maps, at least for the random maps I'm pretty sure I've seen just towers like that for maps where it is hard to place entire walls.

As I said in my last post: the only argument you seem to have as to why infinite farms is bad is that it doesn't allow one specific tactic to be used. I address that in specific there, but even in terms of the specific tactic of starving your enemy I fail to see how having farms be finite or infinite changes the game in any kind of way. If you can keep your enemy within a limited area of the map you have the benefit of having more resources and thus the upper hand in either case. The only thing you might not be able to do is to starve the other player completely, but you wouldn't be able to do that anyway as he could still trade with himself. I just don't see how there is any gameplay reason to starve the other player completely, if you (and I mean this in the general sense not you personally, here and later) have to wait that long you fail to capitalize on your advantage anyway. If only farms and trading is what they have left you should have an enormous advantage, if nothing else because you can farm/trade over a large area. Maybe you're just wanting to torture the other player by having the game drag on for longer than necessary. And to speak of being historically accurate, many sieges in history have been abandoned well before everyone inside was starved to death.

You are very much entitled to your opinion, and definitely to try and convince us to do things one way or another. And we most certainly listen to what you say, otherwise we would have stopped replying in this thread long ago. However, the game is not ultimately shaped by what you or I think is best but rather judged on its merits based on two major aspects: how well it conforms to the game's vision and whether or not it proves to be a good thing through playing the game. How historically accurate it is is one aspect of the vision, but also other things like the main idea for what the game is. Yes, we are open source, but that doesn't mean that it's a good thing to let the game grow into something which is not a coherent whole. And no one of us said that you can't play the game, but rather that if it doesn't live up to what your ideas about what it should be there are plenty of other games to play - or you could create a mod that does things your way. As for the matter of infinite farms: I fail to see how not being able to completely starve your opponent has got any gameplay value? It certainly doesn't stop you from winning the game, especially since the walls in 0 A.D. doesn't exactly allow you to create an impregnable city in the first place, and most likely will never since, again, this is a game and not a simulation so things are not without a counter. True, historically a specific wall might have been effectively impossible to effectively counter since you might not have had siege weapons which would have been able to take it down. But in the game that should not be possible or everyone would always choose one civilization and the others would just be used to fill up the list of included ones.

Well, maybe 0 A.D. isn't going to be your favorite game then I still hope that 0 A.D. will provide some enjoyment for you, and mods can definitely do other things than the official release, but the main game has always been intentioned to be a war/economy game and not an economy/war game or citybuilder. In other words, the area where the game is likely to become more complicated is rather the fighting than the gathering.

0 A.D. is a game of war, not of admiring nature, think about that (I'll elaborate a bit more in the infinite farming thread)

Most matches should be over well before 3 hours. I don't mean that the game shouldn't be possible to play for 3 hours or more, just that it's not a priority to implement something that will not be seen in most games. Also, I haven't really seen any convincing arguments why this would be a good idea/improve gameplay, or even be realistic. I can't say I'm an expert, but I don't know any examples of any significant forest plantation in this era. Rather the opposite, though most of the deforestation might have been before the game's time period.

You have far more skills than I do, that's a start So keep at it, you need to do things which go beyond what you are comfortable with to improve your skills after all

And how would that help you improve? I think from what I can tell that you have a good set of skills already, so I suggest you see this as a chance to develop them further

Not sure how much is relevant, but it's about the Sea peoples: http://www.karwansaraypublishers.com/cms/karwansaray/ancient-warfare/about/readmore-aw/8-ancient-warfare/ancient-warfare-blog/300-studying-the-sea-peoples.html

To me the main argument pro having infinite farms is that it removes micromanagement in the late game: when you have to manage up to 300 units it can make a big difference if you have to go back to your farmers to make sure that your farms haven't run fallow. It could of course be slightly lessened with a reseed queue like in AoK:TC, but you would still have to keep checking back to make sure it wasn't empty. Another way to do it would of course be to make the reseeding automatic, however that would remove the direct control from the user (minor issue true, but infinite farms doesn't have that issue). A question: do you actually want to influence the game or just argue a theoretical point? If the latter that's fine, but you have to forgive others for understanding it as being about the actual game and argue accordingly. If the former it would be beneficial to your cause if you would allow the discussion to be relevant to the game and not just include the arguments you personally deem relevant. I'll say what I've said before and most likely will say again: This is a game, not a simulation. Or in other words: We have to consider things both from a historical point of view and a gameplay point of view, and it's the latter which is predominant. And just to illustrate that it's not just my own personal opinion allow me to quote from the official vision document that has been guiding 0 A.D. for years: and more specifically: Now, I'm not a native English speaker, so allow me to deconstruct the above sentence. "The point laymans terms", I assume you mean "The point in layman's terms", which definitely is understandable, but seeing as you argue about language it merits being mentioned. "The point [...] is the way we interact in a strategic way against either AI or humans." So in other words, the point of your arguments is that we interact strategically with either AIs or humans and that it's important to you that this interaction is historically accurate?