real_tabasco_sauce

So we will fetch upstream and rebase each time we want to make a change? It seems like a bit of a chore compared to svn and I'm sure I will mess that up frequently. Although, maybe i'll get used to it. Is there really no way to just automatically update the our fork with 0ad/0ad?

good eye!

How do you suggest we keep our forks up to date? Syncing? make it a mirror? I can't seem to set up a push mirror.

Yes, this became pretty apparent to me when I went back and looked at alphas 8 - 12.

I see our phabricator accounts are registered, as I tried to sign in. Are we allowed to sign in yet? If so, I think I locked myself out XD. Btw, it looks super clean and organized. Well done @Itms and others!!

https://github.com/0ad/0ad This is it right?

Yeah I think its just a matter of where to place said if check. I'll raise an 'issue' or however it will be done on the git instance.

Haha no, I'd like to think that. It was actually working after all, its just the Aura tooltip is there whether or not the aura is actually in effect.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone and I have been working on some player facing stuff: https://gitlab.com/real_tabasco_sauce/cimbri-refinement

Screen Recording 2024-08-18 112629.mp4 I had seen this behavior before in multiplayer games but never thought to test it. It seems when using large selections of units, some amount of them cannot fluidly get the new path. They pause very briefly while the rest smoothly get the new instructions. So if you spam click, those affected units never move. What is interesting is that after re-selecting all the units, its the same 10 -15 units that pause. Maybe not all the unit's instructions are calculated by the end of the turn so they have to be done on the next turn? It affects both a26 and svn. i'll make a ticket too unless there is a duplicate. So players, if you are upset some units aren't moving, don't spam new orders!

Well, I added the text just to this particular aura description since its the only one that requires a tech in the game. I tried for a bit to come up with a lasting solution to no avail.

The shields the enactment soldiers use in this book look pretty nice: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=7aBGEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT7&dq=teutobod&ots=bJbD6ZUQYm&sig=F_tjU-wjjn3xLHFOG7HyG4niQEU#v=onepage&q=teutobod&f=false

<p class="warning">WARNING: there is a required technology</p> <p class="warning">WARNING: there is a required technology</p> <p class="warning">WARNING: false</p> <p class="warning">WARNING: there is a required technology</p> <p class="warning">WARNING: true</p> Ok, so it does work, its just the tooltips that are not accounted for. So I think the solution at least for now is to just use some text to indicate that a tech is needed for the aura to take effect.

"affects": [ "Human" ], "affectedPlayers": [ "Enemy" ], "requiredTechnology": "healer_aura", "modifications": [ { letting the aura require 'healer_aura', a tech for this particular unit, does not work. No errors are thrown. It just fails to limit the aura until after researching the tech.

I think a lot of players are happy with what the base game provides and don't find it worth it to get mods.

I am trying to get a technology to enable an aura in the project @wowgetoffyourcellphone and I are working on. I see in (https://code.wildfiregames.com/D962?id=3889#change-h6zNMxpe2m5x) that a technology could enable an aura. However it looks like this no longer works: https://code.wildfiregames.com/source/0ad/browse/ps/trunk/binaries/data/mods/public/globalscripts/Templates.js#:~:text=rP24290-,/**,},-rP18733 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4093#:~:text=// Auras don't have,.reqs) Am I missing something, or was this capability lost in the efforts to reorganize aura and technology simulation? Any ideas on what it would take to bring it back? At the same time, we have got this which seems to indicate auras do support required technologies: https://code.wildfiregames.com/source/0ad/browse/ps/trunk/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Auras.js#:~:text=Auras.prototype.CanApply,}%3B

So you mean when a P exists, unitAI.js should call a separate query setup/activation function(s) in Rangemanager and use a separate EntityDistanceOrdering? Or do you mean using the function to re-sort an existing set of targets within UnitAI.js?

Hmm, well the rough sort is a new function. If no P value is used in the template, then the regular full-precision sorting is used.

The target isn't performance, I just want to avoid making it worse. I think its a significant gameplay improvement, as it really helps with melee units not all pathing to try and hit the first unit when there are other targets nearby (see the video I posted on page 2). Also, it helps for ranged units to not all shoot the closest unit when there are others really close behind. So for ranged units, it elegantly avoids overkill. I suppose it also looks more cool/realistic as @wowgetoffyourcellphone pointed out earlier. The improvement will be the best for han crossbows which experience overkill when more than 3 xbows hit an enemy ranged unit, or more than 6 xbows hit an enemy melee unit. That being said, its not a huge departure from the way fighting works, and it may not be noticeable to the casual player. There are also possible gameplay downsides to choosing too large a P for a unit, like spreading damage too much over units. However, if one unit should be targeted, the typical player will specifically attack that unit anyway. And, with the P values being determined in the templates, any undesirable behavior can be adjusted or removed on a per-unit basis.

If another volunteer or two could profile this patch, I'd be super grateful!

hm maybe some time players could attach an email to their lobby account (maybe then opt into/out of notifications like release trailers, etc), and use a email confirmation to prove the account is real.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH6Bv4YdmB0 @SaidRdz defending a big siege tower ball.

how about a 24 hour timer after a new account is created before a player can make a new one. I suppose it would be pretty easy to go around with a reinstall for example, but at least it would make spamming new accounts more difficult. just a thought.

its not that deep. There is an offender, the offender is being dealt with thanks to @Norse_Harold

I remember a time when he wasn't like this. Its gotten much worse in the last years. Sure, its possible to appease and tolerate, but this shouldn't be required to be treated decently by players online. I think his behavior is pretty much indefensible and its definitely not only about privacy.