feneur

The thing one needs to remember in addition to everything directly concerning getting the money and all technicalities is that money is not the main thing. Development, and more specifically skilled developers are. Money is just one method of trying to get that, and I think it's vital to make sure you have a plan for how to actually spend the money before starting to try and get it.

The last things myconid has been working on will not be added to the game at all until after Alpha 11, and even the ones which are already added are not enabled by default for now. So it shouldn't affect performance at all at the moment. (Unless you enable it of course, but with a reasonably modern graphics card it really shouldn't be more than mildly noticeable, at least for as long as other things take a greater toll on performance.)

I'm pretty sure Philip has done something like this at one point, not sure if that was related to the ffmpeg or something else though, so I'm not sure how much help it would be. Just a moment of encouragement to talk with him for the person who ends up implementing something like this

That tooltip is getting larger and larger But in this case I think it's fine since it's such a specific and important thing. I really think we should start to think about eventually implementing a "barebones" GUI version But then the problem would be to decide what's the most important/enough for those who already know the details

Really cool to see how "worn" it is Most other images I've seen have either been closeups or plain desert (which of course also is a sign of wear, but still not as obvious as this ).

Wouldn't it be more worthwhile to e.g. get the builders to spread out along the entire length of the walls being constructed? Instead of all of them trying to work on one piece at a time, there's always going to be situations where that will be an issue (depending on how we do other things, but I doubt we can get away all cases of other things getting in the way), so I'd say it's not worth spending too much time on fixing the worst case rather minimizing the risk for it happening at all. (Or at least try and minimize the risk first, then make sure it's less of an issue if it happens, imho.)

This time we feature Deiz, one of the more recent contributors to join the team, but also one of the more productive recently. He's mostly been working on tons of smaller things that together have improved the game enormously, for example he's made improvements to walls and gates, the in-game chat, added the ability to resign and improved that, and a lot more. So, without further ado, let's get to the interview: Tell us a bit about yourself? I've been dabbling in free, open-source game development for the last four years or so. The main project I contribute to is Naev, a game similar to Escape Velocity (a series which many old-school Apple users ought to know), though 0 A.D. has usurped my free time as of late. It's a much smaller project than 0 A.D., so although I'm primarily a programmer, I've ended up doing a little bit of everything along the way, from sound to art to web design. What have you found most interesting about contributing to 0 A.D.? The development team itself. Given my past experience, 0 A.D.'s development model isn't unfamiliar to me. What's new, though, is the team size. I'm used to working with a handful of other core contributors, where everybody knows what everyone else is up to, and adding a feature generally means implementing it yourself. With 0 A.D., it's refreshing to work with a team numbering in the dozens. There's progress from others to be observed every day (whether through the SVN commit log, on the forums, or in the IRC channels). Not to mention the delightful laziness factor: It's sometimes nice to be able to file a ticket and rely on another contributor coming along, sooner or later, and fixing the issue. Anything you want to add? I'm really impressed by how quickly 0 A.D. has progressed. I remember hearing of it around the time of the initial source release, and finally ended up playing one of the early pre-alpha releases. As I recall, the game was extremely sparse at the time — It had nice visuals, but was missing AI support, multiplayer, and a host of other critical features. I rediscovered 0 A.D. some four months ago, and was floored by how far the game has come over the last two years, especially for being a wholly volunteer-driven project. It speaks to an active, healthy developer community, which is largely what spurred me to becoming a contributor.

And on the G+ page https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/105243244628275530704/105243244628275530704/posts

We too However, as I said, it's a big thing, so it will take some time. Especially if it's to be done right, and that's what we want There are several places you can find others to play with for now though, the #0ad channel on IRC (http://webchat.quakenet.org/?channels=0ad) or the Hamachi servers listed elsewhere in these forums (just search for hamachi in these forums) or the Steam group ( http://steamcommunity.com/groups/0AD ).

In game use Ctrl + W/S/Up/Down (you might have to turn of the camera restrictions in the dev overlay to get the exact angle you want.

Could you please post in the bug reports sub forum with more information? What is it about them that doesn't work? Does it happen on all maps, all civs, etc, as much information as possible. And perhaps most importantly: which game version? I just tested the development version and it works fine as far as I can tell. However, due to ship movement not being finished the ships can some times end up blocking each other, perhaps that is what you mean?

The question is not whether or not to fix issues, the question is whether or not this is an issue And that may be a matter of opinion, but I have yet to see anything even come close to being a good argument as to why we should remove either the ability to control the sheep or their LOS. True, they might be used to scout, or exploited you might say (note that I'm not saying you are/would say, only that you might ), but I wouldn't call it an exploit as it does have its risks as well.

Well, either way, they will need to be controllable later when herding (task them to a corral and you get a slow, but infinite, stream of food, but you will of course still be able to kill them for a quick gain) is implemented, so why disable it now for a relatively minor issue like this?

Would it be possible for you to add that in with a .cfg toggle? The dream has always been to be able to toggle it on for e.g. screenshot purposes, so if it's not too hard to do it would be nice to have that included. Would it even be possible to toggle it on/off in-game with a hotkey?

Well, I'll leave the actual issues to the programmers (though sure showing them in the FoW would of course make things work, but could present other issues: you would still get info on what goes on in FoW by seeing where they cannot move etc, true it minimizes the issue, but my point is it doesn't remove all issues), but the main thing is: do we want to complicate things just for a tiny bit of added "realism"? Which isn't all that much of a point if you look at things for what they really are, sheep in 0 A.D. are hardly representing individual sheep. If you look at things in a more metaphorical way (which you have to with the game in any way since it's not a simulator) you can argue that the sheep represent a herd of sheep together with a shepherd. So to me the issue is more that taking things a bit too literal will complicate them without making the game any more fun (or really any more challenging, after all the LOS of sheep is pretty small as your screenshots show, and even now without the ownership change they are easily killed).

They are meant to be controllable yes. And it would add other issues if you wouldn't have LOS of your sheep. However, until capturable animals are implemented (then they will change ownership to the enemy as soon as they are within LOS of one of their units and not in the LOS of one of your units) they definitely are a bit more usable as scouts than they should I think it's fine for the moment though, especially since you in one sense are providing your enemy with a free food source (as long as he sees it and kills it of course).

Another thing to remember is how do the roads work once they are created? Can you build other things over them? Are they destructible? One of the biggest issues I had with roads in EE (I think it was EE, I don't remember if it was 1 or 2 though) was how once the roads were built they were stuck where they were. There was no way you could get rid of them (maybe destroy them with siege, but still even that was cumbersome and I don't remember if/how well that worked), which might be ok in some sense when you had built the roads as it was your decision to put them there, but not so much when the AI ally decided to put a road right through your city And if the roads are destructible/removable that presents its issues as well in terms of pathfinding etc. I just don't see how roads can add enough to the game to justify the issues that comes with them. Maybe for part 2 if we include logistics/morale it could be a relevant addition (less attrition on roads or something).

No, it will probably still be a couple of releases before that is done. It is being worked on, but it is such a big thing that it will take a lot of testing to get right, but hopefully within a couple of releases a first version will be included.

As far as I can tell you mean "then"

I have a feeling those objects that work are, while more than one part, still one mesh?

Well, I would say those are two very different things. The button/hotkeys are finding-and-selecting (with the focus on finding imho) while the others are ways to select what you already have in front of you. Apart from perhaps the control groups, so for them it would make sense to have the same behaviour imho. I'm not too concerned about it either way to be honest, so I guess I'm mostly debating semantics

In what way is it inconsistent? I'm not saying it absolutely isn't just that I'm not sure what you're comparing it with.

Are the stone-mines (!?) supposed to be that shiny? Or is it just something about that screenshot that makes them look more like rocks wrapped in tin foil than anything else For metal mines it's one thing to make sure one knows what they are, but this is far too much imho.

(The easiest way to record a map without territory borders is to record a map where there are no buildings Or if you want to have buildings I guess you could use Gaia, though then you'd not get any player color on the buildings. These would just be workarounds though, there could already be a way, or otherwise it could be done Generally speaking it's hardly a priority, but since it sounds relatively easy, and would be a huge difference for anyone taking screenshots I think it could be worth looking into at least.)

Well, you were gone, now you're here. Isn't that enough for a welcome back? Plus, everything done is something done, whether it's a lot or a little (at least as long as it's good quality so it won't have to be redone, but your stuff is good.)