Vantha

Thanks. Can you tell me how you pieced them together?

Can you tell me which? It's supposed to be complete, but it might not have been updated consistently enough.

As hidden in the announcement, there's a mod porting guide on the Wiki (especially for the programming side of things):

@Genava55 Though, it would be nice to add proper Proto-Germanic names to the heroes; Teutobod, Lugius, and Boiorix.

Hmm, the AI names of the other civs are always the Latinized versions.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone's and @real_tabasco_sauce's call I'd say, since they worked a lot on the civ and know the vision behind it. I personally, though, wouldn't mind if they aren't from Cimbrian Wars, as long as the characters are still Germanic, from about 0ad's time frame and ideally also historically relevant or interesting.

Hero names were specifically removed from the AI names a while ago (https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/commit/22cbd39bbd46d1bf2e87b8c26ae58f28a6d6fa1e), so that's not an option, unfortunately.

Debate is scientifically very valuable and it seems that you both know a lot about the topic (certainly more than me). But please keep a professional tone and don't get personal. There's nothing wrong with someone simply because they disagree, especially since the language is resconstructed anyway, so there is no right and wrong, just more plausible and less plausible. I think you both made fair points, and with the knowledge I have I honestly am unable to decide which is the better option. Seems right, thanks, I can add it to the PR.

Thanks. I made a PR and went with "þurpą" -> "Wīhsą" -> "Burgz". "Haimaz" is also the root of the German "Heim" (which basically means home), that's why I decided against it in the end. "Burgz" is already used for the Germanic fortress, but that's not a problem, since that's the case for some other civs too already. https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8722

I will try to be as open about how I feel about the situation as I can: For me the die is cast. There are of course several ways to go about structuring and designing a tutorial and connecting it to a story. For me, though, the focus and primary goal of the tutorial campaign is teach how to play, the story is secondary. Following this mindset, a while ago (easy to miss in this long thread), I first put together quite a detailed plan for the campaign's structure, what to teach in each of the individual matches. And only afterwards did I search for a piece of history in which this preexisting plan could be embedded. We did a lot of brainstorming and I eventually came to the conclusion that the founding of a colony (and then also the story around Carthago Nova and Hasdrubal the Fair) aligned best with what I envisioned. Also, it was something new and interesting for me personally -- unlike Hannibal or Alexander, whose stories I've heard and dealt with dozens of times in the past. I am well aware that this might not be the case for many players and that a classic Hannibal or Alexander campaign might have been more appealing to some. However, considering the size of this project and that I'm essentially the only one implementing it, motivation and personal interest are important resources for me. I was deliberately trying to aim for something that also excites me personally, even if that comes at a slight cost of appeal for others, simply to help myself stay motivated to work on it. Keep in mind that I am still doing all of this in my free time. The main thing is not to make the tutorial campaign absolutely perfect in every single aspect, but to eventually finish it and get it into the game, to help new players learn the game, and along the way to provide better storytelling features for future campaigns. And again, in my opinion the idea with Carthago Nova still fits really well and elegantly onto the learning and teaching process I had in mind. And it's also historically fairly relevant. For these reasons, I want to make the story of the campaign self-contained and only revolve around Hasdrubal. @Thalatta@Genava55 These are good concepts and I can definitely see how they would make for great campaigns, but for this one, I want to go in a different direction. However, making some usual story-focused campaigns as well for more experienced players is still a big goal, and ideas are always welcome. It could make sense to open a designated thread for campaign concepts like this.

Right, but there they're sorted side-to-side instead of front-to-back, not both.

The current sorting is still only one-dimensional, unfortunately, so only front-to-back, not side-to-side.

Me too. The campaign features have higher priority for me since they'll probably be more exciting for players, but as I said in the encyclopedia thread, I am also going to continue working on the encyclopedia eventually and then hopefully finally get it into the game. They are both huge projects, they have taken and will still take a lot of work and time, but it'll be great when they're completed, I believe we gotta think long-term here. In theory, yes, but you always have to account for smaller screen resolutions, where the in-game screen is quite cluttered already, so there aren't really many options. Maybe moving it to the right edge instead could also work, but there on small screen resolutions it'll conflict with the dropdown menu and also the tooltips of the units and buildings in the selection panel. Yeah, I'll do that, it's a comparably quick change, I just want to get a few things of my plate first.

@Gönndolsalv Hey, I only just now saw your message. So here's an update from my side: I remain convinced that the game would really benefit from a new tutorial and that the story around Carthago Nova would make for a great campaign. And this project is still a big long-term goal of mine. And, yes, there absolutely is progress, even though it might no be always visible to the outside. As I explained above, when I started making the campaign last year, I essentially came to the conclusion that the game just lacked the capabilities to tell the story and teach the player stuff the way I had imagined it and would personally be content with. So what I decided to do was to lay down the campaign and instead to first implement these features myself, and only then pick up the campaign again to write it using that new functionality. And in the last year I have worked on all points that I mentioned above: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/7785 https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8318 https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8614 No PR yet, but I have started working on this and more (like highlighting GUI objects to explain what they do) locally. I ended up creating a new set of terrain textures for it from scratch: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8214 And the first map is basically done. Now, all of these PRs are still open, meaning the features aren't in the game yet. And realistically, it'll be quite some time before all of them do and until there's an actually playable version of this campaign. Especially since lately I've obviously focused more on stuff for the R28 release. However, even though I can't promise anything right now, my personal goal is to get it all ready for R29. I can always use help, but not really with coding, just input and feedback is always helpful to me. Also, I would love to have illustrations in the campaign, so if anyone is, knows, or finds an artist to draw some images to our story (when we eventually get to writing it) that would be incredible.

It works for me just as expected. Have you tested it with other maps? If it works with other maps, the issue probably lies with your trigger script.

For the German speakers:

My idea is to place each tip in one category of each, e.g. the siege tower tip in "Medium" & "Military". That way the number of tips per combination stays relatively small and will hopefully make it easier to find specific tips or browse in an area that you're interested in. An index for all tips would be nice to have indeed, and some basic search functionality too. But that'll be more work.

All clear now? (it would be possible to run the game headlessly (with no rendering) and to force it to execute turns a quickly as it can)

Yes, notifications are the best way to communicate stuff like this from the simulation to the GUI (and it works just as @phosit said). What kind of calculations? A "tick" in the GUI happens for each rendered frame, so the tick rate won't go up if you increase the sim rate (in fact, it'll probably go down a bit, since the game is busier with the simulation and has less time for rendering).

That's not possible, unfortunately. Essentially, the engine creates different JS script interfaces for different purposes - one for the GUI (scripts in gui/), one for the simulation (scripts in simulation/ and trigger scripts in maps/scenarios/) and one for map generation (scripts in maps/random/). And those Engine functions are always registered in specific contexts. Engine.QueryInterface, for example, is obviously only available in simulation context, since that's were simulation components and interfaces are. Similarly, Engine.SetSimRate and Engine.GetSimRate are only registered in the GUI scripting context, meaning you can only call them from GUI scripts. What exactly are you trying to achieve? There are some possible workarounds because the engine allows you to communicate between contexts and modifying the engine to register SetSimRate and GetSimRate in simulation scripting context too is quite straightforward actually.

Which are missing? Only the two Han tracks as far as I can tell, Red Dawn and Hills of Sorrow.

There is this tip: Yeah, I figured someone would bring this up eventually. An idea I had a while ago but never got to implement was to categorize them by level (beginner - intermediate -advanced, which is already done in the code) and then by topic, like features, units, buildings, gamemodes, etc. How does that sound?

I suppose since the patch contains engine changes, for that you'd currently have to build the game locally... but that version would be incompatible with any other releases or patch releases. If you don't want to do that and are working on a campaign, I recommend you to finish it without the dialogues for now and to just note them down instead. When the PR is merged, the feature will be part of the nightly builds where you can then embed the dialogue and test it.

I hope this gets you as excited as me: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/8614 (please don't judge my sense of humor )

Should it be removed (temporarily) for this release then?