Vantha

Hmm. I'm not convinced. Wouldn't it just add another layer of complexity? What about articles requiring multiple citations? We might end up having to cite every statement individually. And it's not like our texts include controversial opinions or bold claims - most of the information provided is universally accepted as correct - in which case citations become rather pointless anyway. Not to mention the hassle of working with different citation styles for different languages and countries...

Possible, yes. I suppose there could be a small button "View Source" to the bottom of articles. I have some concerns with it, though. Firstly, there is (naturally) no consistent medium or platform we used as sources - sometimes it's a book, other times a Wikipedia entry, and other times again a scientific paper. Maybe I'm overthinking this a bit, but don't you think that would come across a bit... strange? Secondly, does the WildfireGames team event support/allow external links in their game?

Actually, I removed this line entirely here. It was part of the tip about resource gathering which ended up getting too long for the available space in the GUI. It had to be cut down and this line was not directly related to the topic anyway. That's not to say this information shouldn't be included in the tips. In fact, I believe a separate tip about unit ranks would be quite useful. To my knowledge, players are currently not taught about the game's experience system anywhere. Definitely something to keep in mind for the future.

Yeah, I worked a bit messy there... I just copied the folder containing the sources from the old repo to the new one (into gui/encyclopedia/articles/Sources/, for now) and added all missing entries. Although, some comments in the files are outdated, it's at least back up again, ready to collect the sources for future articles.

Got back into writing a handful of articles in the last days. Here's one about the spear-thrower: https://github.com/indoptogopt/GUI-page-for-0ads-encyclopedia/pull/4

Ok, cool. I'm gonna leave it as it is then.

What do you think of this? Is it indication enough that they're buttons?

To my knowledge, players can only be muted in the lobby chat, but not the pregame or ingame chats. I wonder why, though, since hosts can already kick and ban players - so, I imagine adding a mute command to be pretty straightforward. I'd even go as as far and say this is a must, flares can be much more annoying than chat messages.

My tendency would be to treat defeated players as observers and cut them off from their former allies - they can no longer access the team chat at that point either. However, they could still keep their color when flaring to observers - they also keep their color in the global chat.

Well, anyway, here are some more details: - Because all observers would flare in the same color (namely white) I also added an option for flare chat notifications. - Who can see whose flares is pretty simple to change codewise, we only need to come to agree on one possibility. To conclude this thread so far: there are no concerns raised about allowing observers to send flares to other observers. What remains debated, is whether observers can see the players' flares. I'm of the opinion they should.

Yes, that fixed it! I didn't notice there was a different function specifically for registering system component types. Thanks for your help.

Hmm, I still can't get it to work. I already added both the component and interface files. And I'm not querying a specific template, but the system entity (I want the code to be run globally). I believe I've correctly registered the component type and interface. Does the component maybe need to be instantiated somehow? (I've never worked with the simulation code before...)

Is this still relevant? I actually made a patch for observer flares a couple of months back and even created some art for it. (Although the implementation might be somewhat questionable)

So, I want to add a new simulation component. There is no documentation about it, so I tried replicating the existing components' setups. Here is what I did: I put my script in simulation/components/. It calls Engine.RegisterComponentType() at the end. Additionally, I created a script of the same name inside simulation/components/interfaces/ running Engine.RegisterInterface(). From searching the codebase I found most components only do exactly that. For mine, however, Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, <Name>) still returns undefined... Does anyone know why? What am I missing?

That'd be so cool! As @ShadowOfHassensaid, we always hoped to eventually add a big gameplay/strategy section to the encyclopedia. About the scrollbar, it would require no additional code at all - only adding 'scrollbar=true' to the text field. The biggest effort would be designing the new style - which I think really needs to be done if we decide for it. I don't know how you're planning on structuring it, but my suggestion would be to use another interface (the encyclopedia page for example) for the in-depth parts and leave the current flipbook as it is (without adding a scrollbar) as a small section of the whole giving quick, superficial tips - most of the current ones are pretty useful already, but can't be directly expanded upon. Interesting, I didn't know this feature. I have a whole list of possible topics for tips, but currently lack time to create the text and images for them. I'll note it down.

Why not make it optional then? A gamesetting called "Reveal enemy civs" (which is enabled by default) There is an old ticket about it, it suggests to also hide them on the gamesetup page. I definitely like the idea. https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/issues/3971

Yes, that's possible. Although, I'm afraid the default scrollbar style (which is white and yellow) won't fit the parchment background. I guess I could create a simple, black scrollbar in the same style I made the other UI elements. But, as of now, no tip text exceeds the limit (which would need a scrollbar) and it could be argued that the tips are intended to only be this short in length and not to go too much into detail..

I made smaller changes to the patch and ported it to git: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/6997

not. It's supposed to be AD 20, of course, my bad.

I just opened a pull request for it: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/pulls/6980

In some regard, yes. Helping to reunite China and establish the Eastern Han dynasty probably marks their biggest entry in history books. This happened around 20 BC which falls out of the 500 BC to 0 AD timeframe by a short margin. However, the later cavalry unit of Gongsun Zan (which stayed active into the Three Kingdoms period) popping up in the Google search results is actually not the same as the Youzhou cavalry of the Han dynasty. Gongsun Zan founded and trained the so-called "White Horse Volunteers" (or "White Horse Cavalry") based on the earlier Youzhou cavalry. Although these two are often confused with each other, they are strictly speaking not the same unit - not only in terms of their name, but also their role and equipment. Additionally, the Youzhou cavalry already existed in the Western Han dynasty. While they didn't attract as much attention at this point as the did later, they took part in campaigns and battles against the Xiognu - the pivotal conflict of the Western Han dynasty. The Youzhou cavalrymen were settled on precarious border regions to be readily available at all times. That's why I'd argue they were militarily more valuable than a prestige regiment garrisoned around the capital.

I'd be fine with that. Though, I think my first pick would be the Youzhou cavalry. Mainly due to their explicit mention as shock units and their actual military importance compared to other cavalry divisions.

No, I have not forgotten about this. Han Champion Cavalry Spearman This unit is currently called "Wu Wei Yin Cao Cao Guard" (which strangely enough includes the word 'guard', even though though the specific names are supposed to be in the native language?) To my understanding it represents the tiger and leopard cavalry which is an odd choice of unit to say the least; this corps was part of warlord Cao Cao's army. Cao Cao lived at the end of the Eastern Han dynasty (contrary to the fact that the in-game civilization is focused on the earlier Western Han dynasty) meaning it falls out of 0ad EA's timeframe by 200 years. Moreover, Cao Cao led private armies, followed his personal interests and was actually co-responsible for the Han dynasty's downfall. I think it's obvious why this unit doesn't fit. Because the Han champion cavalry spearman's visual actor looks pretty generic, I believe changing its generic and specific names would be enough to turn it into a historically better-fitting unit. Here are some that I found in my research: Firstly, the most obvious for champions would be the Northern army, a standing force of professional soldiers. Three of its regiments are cavalry: - Yuèqí. Comprised of Yue people (ethnicity from southern China). - Túnqí. Heavy cavalry stationed near (and guarding) the capital. - Chángshuǐ. Comprised of Xiognu tribes that had joined the Han. Another idea are Wūhuán. Some nomadic peoples allied with the Han in the fight against the Xiognu and even settled on Han territory. While they were viewed a "barbarians", they were also - due to their lifestyle - very skilled on horseback and enjoyed elite status in the Han ranks. (Although, I was neither able to verify how frequently they actually fought for the Han nor whether they actually mingled under the Han troops. Plus, they were mainly known for the horse archery - and not melee fighting) One last option is Yōuzhōu cavalry. Youzhou was a precarious border region around modern-day Beijing known for their valuable cavalrymen (renown for fighting as shock troops) who helped Liu Xiu to unify China (and thus founding the Eastern Han dynasty) and also appeared during the later Three Kingdoms period. Sources:

Yeah, some quotes might be a bit silly. But they're still worth keeping in my opinion. The only issue I can think of with adding a player table is that bots don't have a connection status and players with 'Random' not even a civ to show. So, while it'd definitely be useful and relevant for multiplayer games, for a causal singleplayer 1v1 such a table could become kind of pointless. Valid concern. How about adding a subtle brown underlay to the buttons' base texture? Something like this:

Thanks everyone. Appreciate it. The two buttons had the usual stone button style in older versions of the patch. I decided to create the new sprites to better blend them in with the parchment in the background. I'd like to keep them. I like the quotes on the loading screen a lot, but they shouldn't become the main focus of the page. Maybe just add a list of players with their civs and connect status? Somewhat unimaginative, but at least relevant to the upcoming game.