Ceres

@Stan`Thank you so much for your lightspeed and helpful reply. You must have mind-reading abilities, too, as I just wanted to ask how to answer 'npx eslint --init'. But now I can just use the already available config file you pointed me at. 2 furthers questions: 'npx eslint --init' creates .eslintrc.js, instead of eslintrc.json. Shall I rename it? To which? This remains unclear to me after reading the README.md, but I can just try which works. I do not use arcanist (yet). Is it recommended for me when I (currently) just want to contribute to a few simple patches? Can I use the external ESlint without arcanist? (this was my understanding) PS: I stopped trying to build/help with patches under Windows 10, as it's indeed overall a pain in my back.

Do you use e.g. ESLint, when you write new or edit JS code? Thanks for sharing your experience!

Well, I agree that deforestation is in general, i.e. also in real life, ugly. But for realism in 0 A.D. I would doubt that trees regrowing during a match would be good. If you built too many e.g. ships, you should cope with "empty forests". And if trees would regrow, you could not chop some away to later have place for e.g. a new CC. On the other hand, it could be fun. Anyway, I understand it's only possible via a mod and not a simple toggle to implement. One could maybe consider it new fish spots could apparate from time to time, but that's maybe connected with the same technical consequences said before.

When not using a formation, I experience regularly that my units cannot attack the enemy in an optimal way, because just a few of them in front attack, while the rest stands behind without contact to the enemy units. Well, if it's archers, it doesn't matter, but for melee it does. I assume that if you use an organized frontline that exceeds the enemy's line, will "wrap" around him, but right now I cannot tell for sure. Try it with the Atlas editor and placing some units to play with formations. BTW, I like the idea of a bonus for a certain formation.

@Gurken Khan and everybody Which proposals do you have for some good, accurate, and obvious visuals or information?

Very clever! Thank you! And no, we non-English native speakers should not need a TOEFL or aequivalents of. I like the translation stuff of 0 A.D. and would be happy if that could be possible for the editor as well. But that's another story for another thread... @Stan` Is it possible in the forum to save single posts for later reference?

I'm not sure what you mean about the tutorial: First come to an agreement what we want is certainly needed. Do you want to see the proposal in a tutorial? About the code - is it there? https://svn.wildfiregames.com/public/ps/trunk/binaries/data/mods/public/gui/session/ How do I find my way around, i.e. where do I have to closer look for JS about that panel stuff?

@Stan` By GUI modding do you mean both code and arts/gfx? What would be your proposal how to make it clearer also for new players? For the time being we could add "any".

Could buildings that are needed to progess to the next phase get an icon like II or III? E.g. like this? (look at the icon for the barracks) Numbers of needed buildings are not shown, though, and I have not paid attention to accuracy - this is just meant as a proposal how it could look like. If it helps, I don't know.

Hm, I got this on Debian 11: user@Debian:~/0ad$ svn revert --depth=infinity svn: E205001: Versuchen Sie »svn help revert« für weitere Informationen svn: E205001: Nicht genügend Parameter angegeben (referring me to svn help revert and telling that not enough parameters have been provided) Oops, it's because of the missing period (current root folder). This way, it works for me: user@Debian:~/0ad$ svn revert -R . Rückgängig gemacht: »binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/helpers/Commands.js«

https://www.worldhistory.org/Gorgo_of_Sparta/

Is it "only" arts to be adjusted, so units can be garrisoned from all civs, or are there other obstacles? I like the possibility to garrison them there very much, as well as how it looks. Maybe garrisoned women can spill hot water or oil on enemies? Maybe just 2 minor comments about the looks: The silhuettes here look as if the men wear stockings. Is it necessary to show silhuettes if there is no roof? I know that silhuettes can be toggled on/off, but that's always for the whole game. The red rings of selected units are projected to the ground but only visible when that gate is open. The rings are not very helpful here, IMO.

Can you maybe please provide a screenshot about this? Thank you! PS: I'm playing at 2560 x 1080 resolution and never experienced something like you described but could reproduce it in windowed mode, I guess.

How do you guys revert other changes for a diff/patch? I did a manual wget <the other changed file> to revert it to its original state from SVN, but maybe there are easier solutions via SVN? The patch is ready for review - credits go to @nwtour - thank you! https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4254 @nwtour Is the greenbox in your screenshots just to focus readers to the most important content, or do you use it also for in-game testing, where background does not matter? How do you do this?

If it's no problem to show all units, that's the most complete info you could get and base your decisions on it, I agree. We don't need 6 times the icon of an e.g. archer. If there are 6, show the icon and below 6 lines indicating individuals' health. Would that work? This is certainly too far away, but maybe some are interested in this: d3.js, e.g. heat map examples. You can beatifully visualise data with d3.

I wonder how a scroolbar works with 20 garrisoned units and you are hectically looking for units that are healthy enough to send them out. But yes, it might work. This is about infographics and visualisation of data after all, I guess. On the other hand, why bother to see that individual health bars and then manually pick some and send them out? Instead you could set a threshold (before or in-game) that when clicking "Ungarrison healthy units only" only units with health above that threshold are ungarrisoned. When clicking on "Ungarrison all selected units" send all of them out. Would this be an option? @LetswaveaBook Or is this far away from your thoughts?

Where in this small space do you want to show individual info? Yes, by right-clicking would work, but then you have to go through all of them. Or could we maybe have a narrow colour line on top of each group at the least, showing the group's overall health? Thus, we would at least see health per unit type: I wonder how health of the 11 units could be shown individually, besides by right-clicking or - a bit faster? - hovering over them and then popping out the individuals. Maybe like this, i.e. when you right-click or hover, they pop out (quick & dirty - I'm no artist ): But if you garrisoned 20 units, there would be no room for that many.

You mean that 0 A.D. 64bit on Linux is faster than 32bit on Windows 10 on the same hardware?

PS: How can I create the diff restricted to this patch, i.e. to the changes in '/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/helpers/Commands.js'? I don't want to include the previous changes in '/binaries/data/mods/mod/gui/modmod/modmod.xml'. If I diff now, the patch includes both changes. Do I have to undo the other changes first, or is there another way?

Thanks for the nice trick with commenting that line - works like a charm, i.e. the text is translated. And thanks as well for the explanation about the debug messages. Oh my, I learned so much today.

@nwtour Would you mind that I provide your patch in https://code.wildfiregames.com? See below (not full context): /** * Sends a GUI notification about entities that can't be controlled. * @param {number} player - The player-ID of the player that needs to receive this message. */ function notifyOrderFailure(entity, player) { let cmpIdentity = Engine.QueryInterface(entity, IID_Identity); if (!cmpIdentity) return; let cmpGUIInterface = Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_GuiInterface); cmpGUIInterface.PushNotification({ "type": "text", "players": [player], - "message": sprintf(markForTranslation("%(unit)s can't be controlled."), { - "unit": cmpIdentity.GetGenericName() - }), + "message": markForTranslation("%(unit)s can't be controlled."), + "parameters": {"unit": cmpIdentity.GetGenericName()}, + "translateParameters": ["unit"], "translateMessage": true }); } Currently, I don't know, though, how to test it. I would need to have a unit that cannot be controlled - for whatever reason. Thanks for sharing further thoughts from your end.

Commands.js starts with this: // Setting this to true will display some warnings when commands // are likely to fail, which may be useful for debugging AIs var g_DebugCommands = false; Does this mean that the message I saw and which @nwtour kindly provided in the screenshot above, only appears if g_DebugCommands = true? It's set to false on my end, so I wonder why I saw this message at all.

Is it worth the effort?

Is this an easy task? (for me) Where can I find more info about it? Thank you!

I agree. Here a kind of "rubberband effect" would be positive - not they should follow the players but follow each other. What would this mean for maps that have animals scattered all over, though? Should they find each other? I refer to animals of the same type.