maroder
-
Posts
779 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Posts posted by maroder
-
-
4 minutes ago, Stan` said:
That's the keyword. I didn't review those changes.
Yeah, thought so. but maybe you just need to tell everybody that they can commit all the changes they want to their own branch, but that the main branch is restricted.
Github even has that as a nice feature: protected branches
-
@all
mh, yes I guess the boats should lean toward the outside.
And yes I would really like to see this behavior with acceleration and a turn radius for boats (and maybe other units), but unfortunately this is just a hack to get the discussion started. Nothing that can be actually used at the moment.
-
7 minutes ago, Ceres said:
How can you place 2 red target crosses with each redirection? I
look here
https://github.com/0ad/0ad/blob/master/binaries/data/mods/public/gui/text/tips/freehand_position.txt
right-click and drag
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, Stan` said:
Some of them were good and the others were pretty weird or bad.
Isn't that the reason for the git-flow and branch logic? Nothing makes it into the main branch without review.
@Ceres the github repo: https://github.com/0ADMods/han_china
-
1
-
-
But I guess that isn't intended?
-
4 minutes ago, Stan` said:
What?
I just pulled the newest version from github and when I build a field and tell the soliders to gather from it, the will gather, but without the farming animation. Is this just for me?
-
to mention it, if it is not already on the list of things to fix:
There is still the farming animation missing for the soldiers.
-
20 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:
I think it looks terribly inefficient and ineffective. Maybe it would look different if firing at a (more static) group. But if the damage is lower than a regular attack, I don't know if I will be interested in that feature.
I guess this isn't an either or debate. As I understand you could still use normal attacking mechanics, only that you will have another option to "attack-ground" if you want to use it.
-
-
seems more like a joke.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Stan` said:
fit the puddles shape better with rice
I think it would look nice if the rice was a bit more irregular than it is at the moment.
-
10 hours ago, alre said:
anyway, I really feel like insisting that it doesn't make sense to try to be accurate about the historical choice of materials and then have rice fields in patches like those. I mean, it's both unreal and eye catchy, so I guess it's a tradeoff, buth mind about where do you stand.
well it's mostly me insisting and I can tell you that I like to look at nice things. The new wall textures from @m7600 look nice and are historically accurate, so win-win. The rice paddies may be a bit more on the eye candy side, but I would say that's artistic freedom.
Also: this design is adaptive to the ground, i.e. it still looks good if you build on uneven terrain.
___________________________
This is the best I can make it look.
-
1
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
Looking at this comparison, I think all that needs done is to have less tiling in the paddy water. Each section seems to have about 4 repeating tiles of water.
The problem is that the speed is not scaled accordingly. I.e if you scale it up, it seems to move even faster.
And yes the only way to change the waviness is to change the code of the shader.
-
27 minutes ago, Stan` said:
It uses whatever the map settings are on the version you used. We don't support different types of water.
Then there has to be some kind of other effect playing into this. maybe scaling?
Because the water in the fields definitively moves faster and has way more waves than the water on the map.
If it would be exactly the same it would look fine I guess.
-
2
-
-
32 minutes ago, Genava55 said:
Ok, for what I saw it doesn't seem there was an issue on the historical accuracy but on the water level of the rice field.
So should they be more shallow or deeper?
-
1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
DE has them for Han. They're the Cash Crop.
Ah my bad, just tested the standard field.
Alright, found them and yes they still look very nice. Only thing is that the water effect is a bit strong.
-
15 minutes ago, Ceres said:
I like this idea very much. However, if I remember correctly, a similar question about certain terrain (e.g. marshland) could slowdown units was answered that it was not possible or with lots of complexity, only.
Yeah, but it should be straightforward in this case. The Problem is that "marshland" would be part of the terrain, while the fields are are just actors placed on top of the terrain. So no problem adding an aura.
-
1
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Ceres said:
Is this an easy task? (for me) Where can I find more info about it? I mean "history strings". Thank you!
I guess it should be doable for you. here is an example of such an history string:
-
1
-
-
-
On 21/04/2021 at 6:44 AM, Freagarach said:
Keep in mind the history department needs to give their "go" as well
I was going through the tread again and I would again like to discuss or at least understand why rice fields would be historically inaccurate.
@Nescio @Genava55 @Thorfinn the Shallow Minded
From every source I find from my not very scientific research
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301949120_Rice_in_China
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_dynasty#Metallurgy_and_agriculture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_and_culture_of_the_Han_dynasty#Clothing_and_cuisine
http://www.china.org.cn/english/2002/Oct/44854.htm
It reads the rice was of course more cultivated in the southern parts of the china, but that it still was a staple food during that period. So it doesn't seem wrong to me to include rice fields, even when it wasn't grown in all parts of the country to the same extent.
My reasoning is than the models looked really great and unique as far as I remember. Unfortunately now, neither DE nor the Han mod include them, so I can't have a quick look at them again.
If it is so extremely historically inaccurate, because rice was not the "main" crop, would it at least be possible to include them as a second type of field? Maybe in P2 with different stats?
[Edit] Just as an idea: It doesn't look like the city layout/ fields around the CC thing is going to change towards more realism, so we might as well really lean into that and even give the rice fields a small aura that slows down units that walk over them (cause it's harder to walk through muddy/ flooded fields). Then you can have an extra small defense around your CC through rice fields.
-
1
-
1
-
-
45 minutes ago, MoLAoS said:
I would probably implement formation bonuses with individual auras. So for every unit in formation in position within 2 tiles to unit +1 defense or something. Should be quite fast because you only need to check within formations and between engaged formations.
Formation bonus is already implemented, but only used in one case. See: public/simulation/data/auras/units/heroes/athen_hero_iphicrates_1.json
So probably no need to implement it again if you want to use it.
-
1 hour ago, alre said:
I think the improvement is stark,
From a quick test:
I like the movement. A bit less "shifty" than before
-
1
-
-
alright, that explains it
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Gurken Khan said:
I think the phases and the buildings available are already clearly shown and separated.
By that you probably mean the greyed out part and the tooltips?
I can just say that from my point of view this is not ordered nor separated:
And even worse when you select buildings and units:
-
1
-
1
-
Addition of Han Chinese to 0AD
in Game Development & Technical Discussion
Posted
Nah, that's a good trait, you should. But that's no reason not to have a system that can minimize possible mistakes.
But yes some kind of micromanagement is always necessary I guess. Possibly something you could delegate? I.e some form of community reviews.