feneur

Maybe it should be mentioned that the channel is #0ad-dev in case Jason doesn't know, it was #wfg while he was more active

Splendid work

Nope. It's just that there's a limited time for coding/reviewing patches, so it might take a while (Also, bigger things are less likely to be reviewed quickly as they require the programmers to sit down and spend quite some time with the code As opposed to a couple of lines of code that fixes a clear problem and can be reviewed in a couple of minutes )

We already talked, but thanks

No new civilizations should be added once we're out of Alpha. Nor any new gameplay features. The only things which should be done then are balance fixes, code improvements (to improve performance etc), bug fixes, overall graphics code (i.e. things which improve things overall without requiring a lot of things to be remade/edited), and non-gameplay additions (the translation system could be added in an early beta perhaps for example, and a config dialog doesn't have to be done before we call it a beta, and improvements to the multiplayer lobby and such things).

Great work Georg Nice to see things fixed so quickly

Confirmed. Neither the actual action is performed, nor the highlight of the buttons.

Sounds like good solid progress in the time you have had available Looking forward to when the changes are done and reviewed so it can go in the SVN

For part one I really don't think this is worth even thinking about. It has so many implications for other things as you say, and I'm sure a lot of them will have to be reworked significantly. It's definitely something to think of for part 2 though, but even then I wouldn't get my hopes up too high. After all, pathfinding is a big pain as it is, making the terrain much more complex is probably not going to help it. Is there and games out there that has true 3D terrain btw? Would be interesting to see how it can work in reality.

Given the difficulty to even find enough details to design the generic Iberians that's probably not going to happen. But as Michael said, the first obstacle to overcome is to find enough details to create a civ profile. Then the art etc would need to be created, but if nothing else it can be done as a mod after part 1 is released, so it's not like the work of gathering the information would be lost in case we're not able to do it for the version one release.

Not directly. Later the Carthaginian walls were decided to be a civ bonus instead, see http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Civ%3A_Carthaginians#CIVBONUSES

I think you may misunderstand in which direction Sweden is from you (we're GMT+2 during the summer and Central Daylight time is -5, in other words I'm 7 hours ahead of you ), so during the weekend would probably be the best.

The actual code is pretty well documented (at least as far as I know, I'm not a programmer so I can't tell too well/don't look at it too much ), so what's needed is mostly the introductory stuff/overview. If you look at the main Trac page it's the things below http://trac.wildfiregames.com/#Forprogrammers: which I'm talking about As you can see there are a lot of "Outdated" notices, so there's a lot of work to do. Part of the work is being done by the programmers over time, but where a documentation manager would come in would partly be to encourage the programmers to be more active in documenting things (the more technical things specifically as it's easier for the one working on it, and most importantly the new things they work on as it's best to have it documented asap before they forget things ) and partly to make sure that the documentation is organised in a way that makes sense both for newcomers and people who have been with the project for a long time. And of course as you say to keep the basic documentation up-to-date so new programmers can get into development as soon and easily as possible (and there it might actually be a good thing that you are not too experienced as a programmer as you will have easier asking the beginner questions that the documentation should answer If this sounds interesting to you I'd like to have a quick chat with you to get to know you a bit. Do any particular days work better for you? You living a fair bit to the west in the US might make it a bit harder for us to find some good times, but we should be able to find some day that works for both of us

BlenderNation is probably the top resource for Blender news, in either case it's a site for Blender news that is visited by lots of people daily. It would be nice to get 0 A.D. featured there, mostly so we can attract new contributors (hopefully animators ). To just get them to write about 0 A.D. we'd most likely just have to send a screenshot of something in 0 A.D. modeled in Blender and write a short text saying "Several contributors to the open source RTS game 0 A.D. use Blender, if you have the skills you can join too", and I'm sure they'd include a quick article. To make the most out of it I'd suggest we try and go about it a little more thought-through though (After all, if we just have an article posted and it just sounds like a cheap way to look for more contributors I doubt we'd get any, at least any who are good enough to be really useful.) I'll make contact with them to discuss things, but even for a first contact it would be nice to have a few thoughts gathered, and in many cases they just post directly what people send them, so it would not be a bad idea to start thinking of exactly what we would like to say First I think we most definitely should include a screenshot or two, preferably of one or more things created in Blender Second, we should include a quick description of what 0 A.D. is, and some information about the art related things. Collada, DDS, etc etc. Third, I think it would be a good thing to include a few words about how it is to work with Blender for 0 A.D. from one of you artists own experiences. Some good things about the process, some obstacles along the road (can't be all rosy or people will think something is wrong, just something to make it more engaging, like "in the beginning I had to force myself to remember to always turn on option X in the Collada export dialog" or something ). Finally we should write something about areas where people can contribute, modelling and animation (mention the Mauryan Indians). Also, it might make sense to mention the texture maps needed after myconids changes are in since it's so closely related to 3D, but I'm not sure how relevant it is

There's already the IRC channel: #0ad on irc.QuakeNet.org (either use a separate application or just click through to the web chat: http://webchat.quakenet.org/?channels=0ad ). Maybe we should advertise it more though

No. (Of course it's not entirely impossible to have some kind of basic lobby done already for Alpha 11 depending on how useable what Martin has created already is, but generally speaking it's not very likely. Mainly because it's a quite bit thing and will probably need quite some work before being truly useable )

First, welcome back Martin Second, well, the main thing is that it should make it easier to connect to other players and improve the chances for people to have fun with the game. That's of course not news to you, I just want to start looking at the actual features from the right perspective Below is a list of the things I would like to see, listed roughly by importance. Preferably it should work from within 0 A.D. Mostly because of the first reason mentioned above, to make it easier for people to connect to other players. Having to launch another application would make it a bit more complicated. There should be a way to search for games based on certain criteria (they can be defined later, but the general concept should be there from the start). Things like map type (random/scenario, water/no water), victory conditions/match type (conquest, fortress, kind of the hill etc depending on what we can realistically implement), whether cheats are allowed or not, number of players. A list of all existing MP matches, not sure whether in-progress ones should be displayed, but at least in some cases/for rejoining there might be reason to display them. The way I see it the main list should contain the name of the match (either automatic based on match type/map type or custom entered title), a few details about the match. Then you could click on it to see more details including the location of the host/already joined players (as that can be important), the above mentioned criteria, perhaps more technical things like ping etc. You should be able to see/enter descriptions for your match. Say "I and a friend likes to play teamed games against multiple opponents" or whatever you want (though perhaps there should be some moderation to avoid people writing too bad things =) ). It would probably be a good idea for the long run to have some kind of user profiles, both for the community aspect ("I've played x games against player y and won z times", "player y is always a helpful ally" etc etc) and to make it possible to store some stats about players for the competitiveness ("games won/lost" is always a curious one to have as that doesn't say much about the "quality" of the match, perhaps there's a way to do something more complicated and useful). Linked to that you should be able to at least send messages to players who are currently online, perhaps have some kind of PM system for persistent messages as well, but that's lower priority imho. User management, things like blocking users who are behaving badly, some kind of permissions system so you can set up other users as admins to help out with moderating, the ability to delete games if e.g. the description is bad (in the obscene, hateful, spam sense), etc. As mentioned above a friend list would be nice, as well as the ability to block certain users. As far as I understand that's part of this No reason to have a multiplayer lobby if it isn't connected to something (then you'd still have to search for games via IP or something), perhaps you're just thinking of the leaderbords etc? Either way I think it all should be connected. Not necessarily all implemented at once, but the development MP lobby part of the server/user side implementation should take other community aspects like the possibility to include a leaderbord into account I would prefer if it was possible to do both the community part and the find a games part from within the game, and at least the former from a web interface as well. Not sure how easy it is to integrate a login system with both the game and a web server though. I'm sure you'll have a lot of things to think about after a while, my list is at least a fair amount of work I'm sure Development of the MP lobby server can continue a fair bit into Beta though as it's not gameplay/balance related. There should probably not be any major new features in the last couple of Beta releases though, and more or less bug fixes in the final ones. But still, I'd think we'll have at least 5-7 Beta releases before we're done (Maybe more, I'm thinking we might benefit from shorter/more focused release cycles in Beta, and thus more but smaller, but that will have to remain to be seen what works in practice )

That's planned. Cavalry units will be able to capture female citizens. Actually that's about what's been planned See http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Civ%3A_Persians#CIVBONUSES and http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Civ%3A_Iberians#CIVBONUSES and http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Civ%3A_Carthaginians#CIVBONUSES

Well, in the specific case of triggers etc it's not just about the triggers themselves but all the other things needed to be implemented with them and more importantly the campaigns/scenarios would have to be created (which would take several months at the very least). Also, I'm not sure what would be the value of diverting the development effort even further, as said above the development can be split enough as it is with people working on what they want (and as above I'm not saying that's all wrong, I just don't think it's something we should encourage even more). If someone wants to implement triggers, sure go ahead, if you really don't want to do anything of the other things, if it's good enough we'll include it. That's probably where my main point is though (apart from the fact that if we e.g. asked the community "what features would you like to see the most in part 1?" we'd get all kinds of responses, everyone listing their own pet features, and many which aren't relevant to the main idea of 0 A.D.), to know the code well enough to be able to implement one of these bigger things you'll most likely need to have spent so much time and submitted patches etc that you already are on the team As for open decision making, apart from "too many cooks..." (an important reason, though opinion may differ as to how relevant it is) it's mostly due to 0 A.D. having been a non-open source project first and it's hard to completely shake that mindset (not as important in terms of value, but probably more important in terms of what actually affects how things are done). Either way I don't think the solution to moving the project closer to completion is to start discussing adding more features =) I most definitely think we should do a more open overview of things when we're done with part one and start deciding what's going into part 2 and in what order (That said, there's always the risk of some people with a louder voice being heard over other people who might have a more valid point to make, so I still think it's relevant for a limited number of people to make the final decision. )

Plumo, he hasn't got any code in the game yet But yeah, let's just say that if he keeps up like this it's not going to be long until the question is asked

Well, apart from some things which potentially could be cut (formations, maybe not have as advanced diplomacy as we'd like) there's really not much more we can cut. Apart from smaller things (and performance fixes etc) there's really just diplomacy, and the sound system and pathfinder rewrite (both of which are being worked on). A multiplayer lobby server would be good to have as well, and I guess that can be seen as pretty large. There's still a bunch of smaller things of course, but most would really not be worth cutting, we need to have something to set 0 A.D. apart from other similar games or at least make it worth playing. And with all the things we've already cut, triggers, cinematics, etc there's really not much left to cut (See http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/GameplayFeatureStatus ) About e.g. the Android port and other things, it would most certainly be nice to have all the more important things done first, but in most cases it's a matter of either have some less urgent feature implemented or none at all since it's people doing things because they find it interesting. Also, at least that work proved useful since it brought about some architectural changes which made things work better on the other platforms as well. I'm not saying your thoughts are wrong, just that it's proved to be futile in the past to try and do things more strictly There are still things where I'm sure you could help out, but you need to be aware of the issues

Hello Glen, thank you for your application. Would you say you're comfortable with writing more technical documentation? I'm asking because we've already got a guy who's more comfortable working with more user oriented documentation (like the gameplay manual etc) and it would be nice if you could complement each other

That's far too much micromanagement for the general game imho.

I would say that's very educating A learning experience (hopefully), and pretty representative of how things are in the real world (where people pay a lot for things which really aren't worth it just because they're of the "right brand" etc). But that's at least not going to happen here If we let people actually pay for things as opposed to donating it's just going to be additional things like the physical things mentioned above. The thing to remember though is that money in and of itself isn't a solution to any of our problems (apart from perhaps paying for a multiplayer server in the future if that is necessary), sure we can pay developers, but to make it fair it would have to be for more extensive work and then one or more of the developers would have to be able to set aside that kind of time, which is not too easy to make happen.

There's no way we would make people pay for 0 A.D. in one way or another. Voluntary donations is one thing, but we're not going to do something that forces people to pay to get the full gameplay experience. That said, if parts of the team, or someone else for that matter, decides to do something along the lines of a paid expansion/paid additional content after part one, that's another thing entirely. But we're in no way going to require anyone to pay for part one (in part or in full) and any such things would be in addition to the game, not in a way that forces them onto people. Since the game is open source there is no way we can forbid anyone else to do a paid game with the Pyrogenesis engine, just require them to release any changes to the code under the GPL and any data that is based on our data under the CC-BY-SA license. They're perfectly free to e.g. create their own data and charge for that though