feneur

Have you built Atlas?

Thanks for mentioning that last thing, I don't know enough of it to have any real input on that specifically, but it did remind me of one other thing. Note that this is mostly something we as a team need to consider and not a criticism towards Jorma or anyone holding either opinion. It has always been a goal that 0 A.D. should be possible to run on as many systems as possible (both in terms of Windows/Mac/Linux and in terms of different hardware), but when updating the code to take advantage of newer features there's always the risk of limiting the number of possible computers the game can be run on. Should we strive more for the best looking/running game possible or more for the game that the largest number of people can enjoy and play? Of course we'll have to settle for somewhere in between, we can never create the most visually advanced game, nor can we create a game that can be run on every computer (just making the game 3D has ruled that out). But I think it would be useful for the future if we would make a general decision as to what we would like to aim for.

I have talked a bit with a few of the more active programmers, and there are two things which are clear. First, they think Jorma is a highly talented programmer. Second, that it at least can seem as if he's a bit too prone to rewrite whole parts of the code as opposed to improve on what's already there, even if the task he set out to complete would be completed (and in less time, and easier to review) by improving the existing code. This can of course be both a good and a bad thing. The old code might be so bad that the only way forward is to rewrite/it might be less effort etc. On the other hand, rewriting code means it's a lot more code to review for other programmers, and can of course introduce new errors. It can also be hard for someone else to judge whether the rewrite is a good or a bad thing. All-in-all this doesn't mean that Jorma can't get paid/never should rewrite anything, I just think there are a few things he (and everyone else who makes any substantial changes for that matter) can do to make it easier both to review and to accept bigger changes (these are based on things the programmers mentioned, but using my words. In other words, don't blame them if something sounds weird, and don't give me credit if there's something great ): If the objective of the change is to improve performance it should be demonstrated clearly (using e.g. one of the existing profilers or an external profiling tool) comparing the results before and after the code change. If entire bigger blocks of code is rewritten it should be demonstrated clearly that the alternative of improving the existing code has been considered. I don't mean that the programmer needs to write an essay on the pros and cons of doing things one way or another, but it should be obvious that's not just done on a whim, "I can't be bothered figuring out why someone else did things that way so I'll just rewrite things the way I think is best". Exactly how it is done is less important, it can be done through forum discussions with other programmers, it can be a few lines in the Trac ticket describing the thought process (and preferably offering some kind of proof that the rewrite is necessary), etc. Just something to acknowledge that the old code has been considered and not just thrown away because it seemed easier to begin from scratch. (And of course it depends on the scale of the rewrite how much effort should be spent, rewriting a couple of hundred lines of code or something shouldn't need more than a line or two in the relevant Trac ticket while rewriting entire files/sets of files of code should preferably be discussed thoroughly beforehand.) In conclusion, I think (with the above posts and my discussion with the programmers as a base for my thoughts) that Jorma should be paid with the Pledgie money under the following conditions: 1) that he communicates to the rest of the team and the fans at least once or twice a week in a progress report, and 2) that he communicates to the other programmers why he has made the choices he has.

The Sacred Band of Thebe is already in the game, just open up Atlas and search for thebe in the objects tab

It should just be to click a join group button or similar, don't remember as it was so long ago that I joined

If I recall correctly your issue was with saved games, there's nothing in this topic about saved games, so it's most likely another error. Saved games are a lot more difficult to deal with than many other things, which is why there's a need for someone with a lot of knowledge of the code (and a lot of time) to be able to fix it.

Have you tried asking people in the IRC channel? Some might not be reading the forums too often/too closely. Still, it's probably too later for someone to be able to find the time to step in, unfortunately.

Ouch, sorry to hear indeed. Might be hard to find someone on short notice, but at least it's reasonably close to at least a few of the developers. Would definitely have been harder for someone to e.g. replace Kieran in a conference on New Zealand =)

Hotkeys: http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/HotKeys How to change them: http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Manual_Settings (a config file for now, but there will be a config screen eventually) Just hold your mouse pointer over the icon to see a fair amount of information.

It is being worked on, see http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/1719 (it needs to be reviewed by the programmers to make sure it works as it should and doesn't add any bugs (of course some can still slip through, but reviewing it at least means the major things can be found before it's put in the game for everyone)).

Please don't upload images which are more than say 5 MBs in size. As for helping create scenarios for the game the best way is to keep improving your skills and posting scenarios here for people to try. Please take a look through http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Atlas_Manual for more info on Atlas, it's not 100% up-to-date, but it should prove useful. Among other things there is http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Atlas_Manual_Terrain_Tab#Visualise which lets you know how to get a quick idea for if units can pass over the terrain.

Just go to http://trac.wildfiregames.com/report/9 and check the ones under "Art and animation". The rest will have to be added of course, but for the ones already on Trac it's just to look at that list

Are you using the correct/newest drivers for your graphics card? The crashlog reports that your graphics drivers only support OpenGL 1.1.0 which is not enough to run 0 A.D., but from a quick google search it seems as if your graphics card should support more than that.

You can already put your units into groups, just select units and press Ctrl + 1 (all the way up to 0 ), then press the corresponding key (or the control group icon that shows up when you have a group created) to select the group. Double-click to select and center on the group.

Talk with the Rogue Republic guys before making any decisions, but I doubt they'd say no to getting a lot of free help

I would recommend working with Rogue Republic http://www.wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showforum=422 ) rather than TLA, not only because you'd get around any copyright issues (not just including one of the most heavily protected intellectual properties in the world, but also the copyright of the content created by the original contributors of TLA - TLA was never open sourced or anything of that kind, so you'd need the permission of all previous contributors to be allowed to use any of the existing content), but also because it would be easier. TLA never got much further than the concept stage, so even if you'd get around all the legal issues you'd still have a lot of work ahead of you. Rogue Republic seems to be much further ahead in that regard, and since it is actively being worked on you would not just do work which might get abandoned again once your classes are over, but rather something that will continue to be worked on and useful even after you're no longer able to work on it. Also, I don't know how many you are, but either way, there is a lot of work to even get started, and other things apart from actual coding etc. Even more so when you're doing things as schoolwork as you need to document things etc in a different way, so I would expect that the actual time would be less than 30 hours per week of actual development. Not saying that would be different in any project you'd be working on, just that it would be beneficial for you to not have to begin by designing the game as well

Multiplayer is a lot more playable than single-player most of the time as well. Still, there's lots to do of course, but it certainly can be fun to play already And Atlas is of course nowhere near as demanding (at least as long as you don't run a simulation - i.e. a test game inside the editor, or create a random map to serve as a base for your creation ).

You might be aware of this already, but there already is an editor-only Viking ship available

Wasn't the sacking of Lindisfarne in 793? (Not that it's a major point or anything, it's still out of the timeframe of the main game (500 B.C. - 1 B.C. for the first part, and A.D. 1 to A.D. 500 for the second).)

I would suggest reloading the page and continuing from where you were, Youtube doesn't work perfectly all the time =) (Which probably would be too much to ask considering all the visitors they must have on a daily basis )

I wouldn't worry about your voice too much =) Though truly your online persona and skill overshadows the might of your voice =) A great video either way

Oh, ok. Well, presumably it's mostly been tested just to set up the number of players as the map is first created, so hopefully it's something that's easy to fix and just hasn't been caught as no one has tested it earlier

It would probably be nice to add somewhere early on (maybe even in the title) that this is in Atlas and not in-game It definitely sounds like something that should be solved though, but for now I suggest you add the number of players you want before running the simulation the first time

If e.g. a day/night cycle is included it will definitely be something that's set per map/match rather than per player, so no need to be worried about that

For phases, and maybe heroes trained and wonders as well I think it would work well if Omri would be able to just compose a few short tracks (2-3 seconds or so, maybe five or so for phases). That would really make them feel special + it would mean that the risk of having too similar sounds for different things would be lower