feneur

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.

The game is not going to change just because the campaign is done in one way or another I mean you wouldn't call Age of Kings a role-playing/adventure/action game just because it had some storytelling/parts where you mostly control one unit in it

Yeah, but that I leave to you proper web master dudes

Nothing too drastic this time, only a few measures against spammers. First we've replaced the generic questions people have to answer to be able to complete the registration (they were as simple as "What is 1 + 2?", something that's used on many sites and thus is easy for spammers to get around) with more 0 A.D. specific ones. Second, from now on newly registered users will not be able to include URLs in their signatures. This is only a limitation for new users, and as before, once you've posted five posts you're moved up to another user group that is allowed to: include URLs in their signature, use the PM system, and all the other things all users can It's sad that we have to do things like this, but as long as there are spammers out there we need to have ways to combat them. We hope you understand why we're doing these things, and also that you find these restrictions reasonable. (We're also grateful for everyone who keeps sending in reports when they see a suspicious spam post, that helps make sure that the spammers who do get through our filters will not be able to have their spam seen for a long time, so thanks )

He borrowed it Michael (Mythos_Ruler on the forums) who created it used part in-game images and part other images to create that image in Photoshop. As was mentioned before there is an in-game mockup you can try which has the barebones of it though. And just to be clear, as with everything else it's important to remember that the game is a work in progress and that no current images/information is guaranteed to be relevant when it comes to the final game. That said, we do hope to include some kind of single player campaign, and something along these lines is currently the best option we can see to get something done within reasonable time. There is no guarantee that 0 A.D. will come with a single-player campaign though, so the best way to make sure it happens is to either have/get the skills yourself and help out, or try and get someone else to join to help out

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.