myou5e

I've said many times that these hotloadable mods should not contain JS files. The concept of a mod would need to be changed somewhat. There are: Modders of the Engine and game logic. Including JS files and potential source rebuilds. (Forks, really, not mods) There are Mods which can include anything which is now in the mod directory. Then there are mods that modify only non executable files. This can include skins and rebalances of the game. If you have well formatted XML and other non executable files, the security issues are fairly small.

We have some art for this in Palmyra right? But apart from this and some merc camps I guess that there is nothing included in any mod? Is there a repo for this faction?

I think the whole editing XML files can be done way more efficiently. The mixin template thing is a huge, underrated improvement. But I also think a lot of the directory arrangement of files needs to change. In the world of web development, people used to separate files by type. All the JS, CSS, HTML etc would be in different directories. Now. These things tend to be combined together. One page or component from a page uses all of them in one file. It's separating files by Function, rather than file type. I think in the case of this game, it's worth looking at putting Code for 1 weapon or person model into one directory. Something like this: weapons/gladius/icon.png weapons/gladius/model.dae weapons/gladius/stats.xml For new contributors I think it could reduce the time it takes to understand and navigate file structure.

You are doing a lot. Participating in Art development as well as project lead. If we can enable modders more, maintenance would be less time consuming.

They aren't contradictory. But they are separate things. I think when the creativity of modders is enabled more, they will create single player campaigns. Campaign creation tools could be a part of this modding enabling, like cutscenes.

I think mods which just change templates and in game art, while leaving lobby unchanged, should be looked at.

This really breaks the experience flow of the game IMO. Would this be hard to change? I would expect it to be possible for it to reload the templates in the background. no?

I haven't seen any of those mods :-p. You mean these mods are for 0ad? I have seen you support modders @Stan` so I am not complaining about this. Practically, the suggestion from me would be to implement something to do with sharing mods from the pregame scene. As I've said before, provided you are sharing certain types of files, dae, xml etc and these files are well formatted(which is testable), I think security issues can be solved. Even if you want to approve the mods manually and only have security checked mods from Mod.io, but those are available from the Multiplayer pregame, this would be a huge advantage. So the host would select a mod, it would get automatically shared with the others in the chat room(perhaps with a prompt about whether they wish to accept, but I don't think it's necessary, depending on the size.), and they can play with that mod. If you like this idea, I can work on a single player version, but I have very little idea how to make it transfer in Multiplayer. This is just another useful video for game design. The practical thing for RTS I think would be randomizing things. Random maps already exist, but ofc you want random + balanced. And also, there might be things other than terrain that can be randomized. Like start unit count or mercenaries etc. These things keep the game random enough basically that combos(or build orders) can't be memorized so can help to maintain the fresh feeling of the game.

Look at games like Minecraft and Skyrim. Even games like Dota which came from the modding community. If we can make the game so it's tremendous fun to mod, you could have an influx of user created "Hyrule" and similar. Anyone with the right assets can make their own game. I think the Engine itself could use more mechanics(old ones like stealth, attack ground, formations) and game performance(Level of Detail etc). If the options are there, the modders will work out what to do, and the community will vote with their play time. This engine layer would be one that people do not mod(much), or will be more difficult to mod. But templates and art are much easier and safer to integrate and version and pass around.

I really think that if modding tools are great, and the engine is developed more, then the mod community have the potential to bring tons of casual players to the game. The other things related to game success are about things which a good mod could fix. So mod sharing focus is key imo.

I don't know where is a good place to put this thread. But i thought it was a really good discussion to have and I think it will be helpful. Both of these videos I think are extremely helpful for game design and may help to give direction and focus to developers, modders and the project as a whole. Here are some key points: Many players of RTS only play Single player campaigns, and no competitive. For Starcraft 2, this was about an 80%/20% split. Many extremely popular games are extremely moddable: Minecraft, Skyrim, Roblox, Team Fortress, Halo 3. From this, I think that Modding, and sharing and playing mods co/op should be a focus of development. Single player campaigns are great, but this is something which comes after really good modding and mod sharing tools are implemented. Things such as balancing are much easier to do with modding tools, as makers can share their own versions of balancing. Some of these balancing settings could even be chosen from game setup(I'm not sure what to include yet).

Would there be an issue reusing Wikipedia? We could maybe make a little note at the bottom "from Wikipedia"

I agree with this. It seems to me that they should have a major advantage when shooting from behind battlements, in range, power, and defense. Perhaps they should have no increase in splash damage, like from siege weapons. So keep crush armor the same? But increase pierce and hack.

Just like the Pope would not condemn the Kings for certain doctrines or practices which are inconsistent, for political reasons, I would expect Rabbis to be somewhat selective of what requirements they had for others especially when they could gain power by being selective. This is just practical reality of things we see that any religion can and is used for political purposes, just as it seems to be in the case of the leaders who used Judaism to form a distinctive character against the Christians and Muslims. (This doesn't say anything about the truth of the religions)

You are right, it's not missionary at all. But converting nobles does have practical material value for their people as a whole. So it is not surprising.

Very Interesting Video. Still, it was hard to see who they were ethnically. The migration of Jews and the conversion of nobles doesn't tell us much about the actual people, just the official policy of the Rulers.

ABSOLUTELY. We can change my "Restrict to Cultures" to "Mod Selection" Include Up to date mods in the main game. Let people play Hyrule / My Little Pony without downloading mod. (Already Included) Let People play Millenium / Aristeia without downloading mod. (Already Included) Disable these mods by default. The default will be along the lines of "Official Civilizations" or "0AD Official" I don't know how many of those are up to date, but this could be a great way of having "semi official" content which gets play tested/exposed to a wider community.

Fortunately. Making an option available, doesn't mean you have to use it! Also as far as tournament play, having realistic matchups makes sense. You might in a tournament situation want to restrict civs to ones of a similar power, maybe Noba village people aren't able to go against the Roman Empire? So you restrict Civs. Maybe you will say "don't play as the Nobas". But maybe you and some friends want to play some games as the Nobas or similar Civs without OP factions making it ridiculous? This feature could easily result in MORE diversity in the game, because when it's easy to restrict Civs like this, without needing to load a Mod, then it will be easier to add Civs to the game without the nightmare of balancing each time. Just restrict to comparable factions for competitive play. As an example of this, there is already an "Ancient Empires" and "Millenium AD", but we don't include those in Vanilla because they are the wrong time frame. With the option I am showing, this would not be an issue. Just select the 500BC - 500AD Timeframe for vanilla Civs. To play Millenium AD? just choose 500 - 1000AD ! This would be amazing! It's not even that hard to do!

I don't think you would need to modify the UnitAI at all, just Make it possible to "build" berry bushes and farms To build them easily(I mean, drag mouse over a square or circular area, you don't want to sit there clicking on 1x1 squares for 5 minutes) Get the right regen rates, cost and obstruction area.

Another Idea I had for farms. It's not super important and I don't want to push it. But what if the "farms" worked more like berry bushes, you plant the bushes, they regenerate. When they run out of food, they don't disappear like bushes do now, they just sit there slowly regenerating. You would put on as many farmers/gatherers as you need to keep the bushes low, but not so many as to run out, which would result in lost time. It would look nice too, because every civ on this farm/orchard would move from every bush to bush collecting. You could have 10 on one side of the CC at one moment, then all around the next moment. You just need to get the bushes to a good regen rate that makes sense and is comparable to present farms. Also, these don't need to be actual bushes, we can use the same art as the present farms(rice, millet, barley etc), they just have a different internal mechanic. We can also do it for berry bushes, apple trees etc.

Yes, and Yes. It's always annoyed me and felt like pointless micro trying to arrange farms to fill up gaps efficiently and manually placing them. Dragging a box over an area would save (boring) time, look better, be more space efficient and realistic :-p. I think many people are still thinking "age of empires copy". But honestly why do we want to copy the boring parts of it?

Here is an example of the Civilization Selection I was talking about on IRC. The function doesn't work yet, but the idea is that this selection would restrict the civs to those within that group/theatre of war/influence. I think it's actually a way to limit the difficulty of balancing, as we don't need to balance, for example, the Yayoi to the roman empire who would have never fought anyway :-p. We don't need to pretend that these civs are comparable. Additionally, I think that this can make the game feel immersive. Because you are playing real battles. You fight as the Persians in the Middle East, not in the Celtic Highlands. Speaking of which, I want to also want another option on this list "Geographical", so it will limit civs who existed in the maps biome. The brilliant example above doesn't seem to have this function of restricting Civs, actually. But it does look fantastic and makes choosing a Civ more fun, interactive and informative, which is all very helpful. They are different things. Would be great to have both :-p

I really want to be able to drag farmland over an area, and the farmers will fill that area with 1x1 "farms". This could be faster than queing up ten farms around a CC/Farmstead, and also imo more realistic, because I think it doesn't really make sense to not be able to grow a plant on a 1x1 just because it's too small.

Even the red haired woman at the end should have had a helmet on.... Sort of the first thing you would wear.

This looks amazing!