feneur

Got a bunch of the same OpenAL errors Yves got (and I later got a crash, but that was probably related to me Alt+F4ing to shut it down or something. I've attached the relevant files in case someone wants to take a look at it). They might have been caused by there being a lot of sounds which should be played or something as it always seemed to happen during fights, they didn't seem to cause any actual problems though as I couldn't really tell of any trouble with the sounds, they all seemed to play (hard to tell for sure, but I mean I didn't notice any difference in what sounds did or did not play depending on whether or not the error was displayed). interestinglog.html crashlog.dmp crashlog.txt system_info.txt

Testbot never was meant to be anything but a test Jubot hasn't been developed since its developer has been too busy though.

Are all players using the same game version? OOS (Out of Sync) errors usually occur when one player has a different game version than the others.

In Alpha 10 the only really useful bot is qbot, in Alpha 11 the only useful bots are either qbot or Aegisbot. The latter is based on qbot to a great degree, and will probably replace it over time, but for now it is still experimental and can cause errors in some cases. However, it is better on some maps and in some ways, so once Alpha 11 is out feel free to try either. The rest of the bots are no longer developed (most of them weren't meant to as they only served as examples for AI programmers) and are hidden by default in Alpha 11 and unless someone picks up development of them they are likely to be removed completely for Alpha 12. You could still pick e.g. Jubot if you think qbot is too difficult, but it could have issues as it hasn't been developed for quite some time. The ability to choose a strength will most likely come at a later time, but the AI developers would like to focus on creating a really challenging bot, it's easier to "dumb it down" than it is to create a less challenging bot and then try to make it smarter. Since the AI is getting more challenging we might have to add some settings soon though

Please see: http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Atlas_Tricks I tested to make sure the information for Windows and the SVN version are up-to-date, but the Linux/Mac information probably needs to be updated.

You could download the Alpha 10 to do that The only thing that's added to that in Alpha 11 is gates =)

And we have no intention to stop people from selling the game in the first place. We do hope to find some ways to make it harder for people to cheat, but we do want them to copy the game as much as they want/can after all Also, just to make something clear, it's my opinion (and I would dare say the official opinion of the team) that we should not, and will not, try to sell the game in any kind of way until we have a final release. After that point we could make it available for a small sum for people with slow internet/who wants a boxed copy/etc, but even if we'll sell something we don't want to sell unfinished software

Soon new release So not much more than "We're squishing the last bugs" to report

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