feneur

A cool list, I don't think I'd want the alpha to be called "misfortune" though =) Talk about bad connotations

Marvelous work Michael. A real challenge for the scripters to get that into RMS form, but it will be great if they manage to translate your map making skills into scripting

Hello Kira, and welcome to the forums Thanks for the nice words, and I hope you will enjoy playing the game, both now in its unfinished status and eventually when it's finished

I think that's a bit harsh =) I would rather say "nothing is supposed to work perfectly" (Or even well enough to be useful in its current state, but to say that it isn't supposed to work at all is a bit extreme in my opinion )

Thanks for the nice words. Romans will come in the next Alpha So perhaps best to not wait another 3-4 years before checking out the game the next time

Yeah, the Romans siege walls have got to be unique to make them special (kind of a moot point, or at least saying the same thing twice, but I hope you get my meaning =) ).

Yup, I guess I should have been more clear. But yeah, I meant that it was "in the works" in the sense of it being worked on So better to have you focus on other images so we can have as many as possible drawn as opposed to screenshots (though I'd say Michael has done a good job making those look good as well ).

Hmm, just to rule out the obvious one, are you sure the file is properly downloaded? That's what I'd try first, to redownload and see if that fixes anything. If that doesn't help we'll have to wait for the programmers to offer more in-depth solutions

Those are Philip's first proof of concepts, scaredybot more or less just starts up and then sends a message to the player and surrender =) , and testbot is (at least in part) the base for jubot and qbot. In other words, only JuBot and qBot are really relevant if you want to compare AIs.

Apart from the fact that we already have an image in the works for Alexander I think that plan is great And a really cool look as well

I'd think most WMDs were inadvertent back then, things like people starving to death during sieges or plagues and stuff =)

Not sure what you mean with "Not able for 0 A.D.". All of those should be possible, at least with some minor justification to fit the 0 A.D. gameplay concepts. The economy one would just be to have a set amount of resources gathered rather than an amount of resources gathered per unit of time (I don't remember if it's per minute or something else). The tech race and information age deathmatch could also be done, the only difference is that our "ages" are called phases (and there will not be any ultimate techs/nuclear bombs =) ).

Order queues already exists, and have for quite a while now. There are issues with groups and order queues though, but for individual units it works fine. As for the pre-orders, not sure about how easy it would be to implement just that, but at least for single-player gameplay it should be possible to make you able to give orders while the game is paused, which is more or less the same, except you don't need to remember some keyboard combinations other than the "Pause" button =) That doesn't apply to multiplayer though, so there something like what you suggest can definitely be relevant

The Helepolis cannot be garrisoned in something else, but it can hold other units garrisoned within itself.

Another thing to remember is that we intend to implement a special running/charging feature, which definitely makes the distinction necessary. Read more about that here: http://www.wildfiregames.com/0ad/page.php?p=10066

Indeed, there are other problems. My intention was more to issue a small warning that island maps/more than one AI should probably be avoided for now (Island maps can work in multiplayer, if you order the ships one by one and is ok with things being a bit awkward, but for singleplayer they're definitely not recommended at the moment.)

Island maps should not be considered implemented at this point, not only doesn't the AI understand naval combat/the concept of islands yet, but we need yet to implement special pathfinding for ships. In other words: we're aware of the issues and intend to fix them Also, more than one AI is probably not recommended at this point I'm afraid. At least not on larger maps.

There should be no need to locate the files. Atlas should automatically save them in the correct directory for the game to load them. However, by default maps are given the "hidden" keyword, which means that you need to change the map filter to "Show all maps" for them to show up in the game setup screen.

We're continuously working on adding new animations. Alpha 9 will see a lot of new ones, both for animals and other things. However, animating is a lot harder than creating the models, so unfortunately it will probably be a while before everything that we would like to have animated is animated.

The formation system currently just is implemented for walking (and not fully there either), so we definitely will do some more work on it before the game is finished.

As far as I understand that it sounds like a really good solution to at least part of the problems, nice work so far Philip

The main thing is that things are being done, the exact way doesn't matter that much. Since we do use Trac in general it's probably best to use it in this case as well, to make it easier to keep track on what's being worked on and not, and as you say there are some pre-existing already etc, so it's probably the least confusing in any case

Individual pieces are flat yeah, but as a whole several terraces aren't =) But that's not too important I'd say, the important thing is how it works in-game. I guess it depends a bit on what kind of building it is as well. For something bigger like a civic center flattening definitely seems like a better option (possibly with fairly strict limits for how big the terrain height difference can be to avoid the "square pit" scenario), and for smaller things like towers extended foundations/the model going slightly into the ground sounds like a better option.

You're not going to build on the side of a hill =) (Or actually if you do you're probably going to use terraces rather than demolishing the entire hill just to fit in your building ) Seriously though, I think that we shouldn't do full flattening even in the cases where you should be able to build, but more than a little flattening is needed. Mostly because it would look strange with well defined "pits" for the buildings and then the slope continues as before around it. But also since most buildings at least to some extent represent a multitude of individual buildings. But overall I do definitely agree that "full flattening" would be best, I just think there are cases when that would look worse than the alternatives. Preferably most maps should contain enough flat buildable areas for the problem to be minor.

Does those tasks have "proper" Trac tasks?