feneur

There are "bridge sides" in the editor =) In other words, you need to create the middle part manually, but there are parts which you can use for the sides to make it look like a bridge. Then paint the middle part with a road texture or something to make it work well together To find the bridge pieces just go to the Object tab in the editor and start to write "bridge" in the filter textbox (you only need to write "brid" to just have the bridge pieces displayed =) ).

The only thing missing is the visual representation though, just press Shift when giving the move order to set up a path where the units doesn't just take the direct route And I personally don't think the game should babysit your units, when you order them to go somewhere it's your responsibility to make sure their path doesn't go through dangerous territory. It's actually another thing when they automatically go somewhere (units gathering searching for the next tree etc for example), so if anything there should be some logic to help in those cases.

Seems like only some of them are our sounds. At least from what I could tell from a quick listen to their sounds.(This makes me think of something similar Philip (Ykkrosh) did a couple of years ago. It was only walking around in a very simple 3D landscape (so more like the first FPSs ever, I didn't play any of them, but Wolfenstein? is a name that comes to mind, it was looking like that in any case), but on the other hand that was before HTML5/webGL etc =) I don't remember the URL/know if it's still out there, so I guess you'll either have to take my word for it or try and see if google can find something or go bug Philip in IRC if you're really interested. In either case it is yet another reason why I'm impressed with Philip's programming skills )

Hmm, that does feel like a lot of work for something that's really down to opinion which way it should be done. It would be nice if the smoke would go away immediately though. A lot of things are possible for part 2 We will have to finish part 1 before we start deciding what's going into part 2 though Not saying it's wrong to suggest something for part 2, only that it's probably going to be forgotten and lost by the time work on part 2 is begun

Nice suggestions, but they don't begin with the letter 'L'. And that is a requirement as we name the Alphas alphabetically

Most definitely not. However, it's important to give people a chance to experience 0 A.D. as good as it can be and not just as it was at some specific point in time before it is finished (+ it's sad if the 0 A.D. brand is connected to unprofessional behavior/unfinished software)

We do intend to include some kind of diplomacy, it will have to be seen how complicated it will be for the first release though. It might be as simple as in AoK where you could set Ally, Neutral, and Enemy and tribute resources, but hopefully it will be a bit more complex than that Hopefully we will only have to include multipliers and similar things on the hardest difficulty. We will have to see what the AI programmer's can come up with though

Yeah, Ben committed it.

Trading is very much like Age of Kings, let me first note that trading and bartering are the two different concepts in this game: Bartering is what you do in your market when you exchange one resource for another (i.e. wood for food, or metal for food, or stone for metal, or food for metal, or food for stone, etc etc), and trading is when you send a unit between two markets/docks and it generates a profit of one of the four different resources that gets transferred to you at the end of the travel. The amount increases with the distance traveled, and if you trade with another player (though you can trade with a market you own yourself as well).

First, thanks for your thoughts and your nice words Second, here are some attempts at responding to your three things: You can already play custom maps in Multiplayer. However, you do need to manually distribute them to your friends. We do hope to make it either directly automatic (the host selects a map, the game checks to make sure everyone has it, otherwise downloads it for all players who don't have it) or at least create a central hub for where you can download them. Exactly what/how we do it depends on security issues though, we don't want to end up with a scenario where people could use our game to install viruses on people's computers or anything. We do hope to have a good AI for sure, and if not someone else will hopefully create one I remember there being a ton of user-created AIs for AoK at least, and they were a lot harder than the ones that shipped with the game, so hopefully there will be one to fit everyone's need At least personally I'm very much against re-growing trees, and I doubt we will have regenerating resources in the official game (though there are more people than you who are interested in it, so if nothing else there might end up being a mod doing that or it might even be included as a non-default option. Either way there should be no need to as you can trade, and more specifically, you can chose to get either of the four resources from your trading, so if you need more wood, just set your traders to wood, etc

Yes, that's not yet implemented.

Could work as well, I just think it might be a bit more obvious what's going on if the icon is always there when you press the Ctrl key or have pressed the GUI button. Not sure how much of an actual issue it would be though as it's very likely that someone would pass the mouse over a garrisonable building pretty quickly after having pressed that button. I don't think it would be over the top as it's just a small icon, so to me it would be worth that extra added guidance for new players

Hmm, this got me thinking, maybe we could make it even clearer by adding a red icon that's displayed when hovering over anything that can't be garrisoned?

No, you say it shouldn't be shown at all

Or rather grey it out It's still garrisonable, you just can't garrison units in it at that moment since it's full

If we have enough time/skilled contributors we do intend to include operators. It is a very low priority though, as fewer people are skilled animators than modelers, so the people we have with those skills have to prioritize quite a lot and then things like making sure animals are animated at all is more important. Also, this is a game, not a simulation So some things will necessarily be simplified like that, as a related example, it is extremely unlikely that we will make any possible operators separate from the siege engine (which would mean that you would actively have to assign people to them, that they could be captured etc), such things make a lot of sense in e.g. a game like the Total War series where not only is the war part separate from the economy part, it is also much more focused. After all, there you're essentially just managing 20 units (if it even is that many, I haven't played one of them for a long time), while in 0 A.D. you can control up to 300 different units at the same time. (Thankfully you don't have to control every unit individually all the time thanks to units being busy and groups/formations, but still, my point is that the scope of what you can do means that we have to be sure that the things which you do really matters.)

Yeah, I would say, don't rush it. Better to get it really good and we could include it in Alpha 12 It is looking really nice so far, but if it's rushed it's probably not going to be good enough to be included in Alpha 11

Just at a quick glance, and from a non-programmer, it seems like they come from the new changes to the post-game statistics. So yeah, we might need to add a warning somewhere that savegames can't be expected to work between game versions (or even between revisions, though in most cases they probably will, it's just not something we can guarantee ).

Most things will be possible, just not necessarily easy =) That said, we most definitely want to do more story-based campaigns eventually, it's just that they take a lot of time (my own very guesstimating estimate is that having them in part one would add at least two-three years to the development time) so it's better to wait until after part one has been released before adding that (Especially since a full release will get more attention, and hopefully more developers, which would mean that new features could be added more quickly later. But even in general it has got its benefits to actually prove - to yourself not the least - that you can create a full game, and that boost in confidence alone might help. Plus it's good to have a point where you can put everything "on the drawing board" again and evaluate both existing and postponed features and see how they would work together and what would be the best way forward Especially since there are a lot of features that would go well with story-based campaigns, like morale, and logistics, and maybe even things like weather/seasons. I've personally never been a fan of the latter, but that might just have been the way it was implemented in EE =) In either case, I think it's a good thing for many reasons to postpone story-based campaigns, as it means we can do them as good as we possibly can without feeling they're something we have to cram in just to get a complete feature set )

You should most definitely be allowed to post links to images (though it has to be a link to an actual image rather than the dynamic kind of links you get with e.g. the attachments). I've changed some settings which I know have been causing some kind of similar trouble in the past, so please try again, and if it doesn't work please let us know step by step what it is that you are trying to do that doesn't work

And to add to that you can also just select the building and press the relevant number key to change the owner quickly (1-8 changes it to that player number, and 0 to Gaia )

Read the Atlas Manual: http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Atlas_Manual But in short, just select them with the Move/Rotate tool (the fourways arrows) and press delete. If they're actors press Alt when selecting them as the selection by default is limited to entities (the simple explanation of the difference is that actors are objects which can't be interacted with. For example, a tree could be placed both as an entity and an actor, if it's an entity it can be gathered from and will disappear once there is no more wood left in it, if it's an actor it cannot be gathered from).

Well, not exactly. He meant (or at least I think he meant ) that it may be understood as there being a total limit for how many Village phase structures you can build at all as opposed to how many you are required to build before you can advance to the next phase

It seems like it is attached fine, did you do manage to attach it after writing the above? Either way, thanks for your work fixing these issues

Hmm, the only downside to doing things that way is that it won't teach players the total required number of buildings. Not sure how big an issue that is in reality though as most maps doesn't start out with any other buildings than the starting civ centre.