krt0143

Stupid question: What happened to those 4 ships? We're now 5 years later, and while there is a "Viking Longship" in the game, there is no trace of any of those very nice models...

No, there isn't, I checked it in the game, but also with the editor's "shore build" highlighting feature. Try it, it takes 15 seconds: Fire up the editor, generate "Elephantine" maps of different sizes, remove the water, and check what was beneath it. I don't know how the water depth is coded during generation, but it needs to be made independent of map size. On "Giant" size the river bottom is almost at the minimum negative height the editor can handle: While on "Tiny" units can almost walk across, on "Giant" you have to push the "water depth" slider really all the way to the left to make the water disappear.

I mess with it each time I start it... There are things which shouldn't break anything, like this one (there are already a dozen other functions using "Shift"), but well, bad stuff happens. Nah, whatever stupid thing I might do, it's very unlikely to damage the binaries themselves. If I damage something, it would be some configuration file, and always I back those up (elementary modder precaution). That been said, 0 A.D. isn't as straightforward as it might seem, I didn't find where it stores hotkey modifications. It's definitely not in \config\default.cfg, the key bindings shown there aren't the ones I have in the game. Go figure.

Okay, did the test (took 30 seconds): River depth (and thus shore slope) depends indeed on map size. While on "Tiny" size the river is extremely shallow and the slope very gentle, on "Giant" size the river is a maximum depth trench, and the shores are vertical... It's a known bug BTW: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/6848

And to go back on topic: A means to list hotkeys by hotkey... The search in there only searches by function, there is no way to search (for instance) which functions use "Shift". If I want to assign some key to some function, I have to sift through the full list to see if it isn't already used somewhere else.

Great news! I know, and I don't expect miracles, I'm just saying that there is a lot of work for that manual, work for which I'm obviously the least qualified here, knowing next to nothing... "Passionate" is my middle name. But I'm also inconstant and easy to distract/lose interest. I definitely want to help (if my help is wanted), but I am no coder. I understand things rather quickly, but to take a car race metaphor, I'm rather a driver than a mechanic. What I can do though, and I'm usually particularly good at that, is unearth all the bugs 0 A.D. might have. I tend to use any program at 99.9%, so I'm bound to eventually stumble upon anything not working as expected. Now of course if I get dirty looks each time I mention something not working as it should, I'll refrain from talking about it...

Fixed it. By removing "Shift" as a hotkey for selecting/deselecting units. Apparently (although I really don't know why!) having "Shift" also as hotkey for unit selections interfered with the batch production, which now works as expected. Despite "Shift" still being used as hotkey for a bunch of other things. Go figure. Von wegen kaputtgespielt...

Where would I start! First of all that "Manual" is more like a quick introduction than a true user manual. For instance, no mention of the thing wowgetoffyourcellphone told me above, and I guess there must be lots of other stuff, stuff I obviously don't know about unless I learn about it by chance (like that "shift-click" thing). Also there is a lot of inexact (outdated?) information in there. For instance, unlike what it shows, the actual textures do not display in the terrain swatches, only their dominant colors (I have a 8 Go GeForce RTX 3070 Ti, so it's most likely not my hardware). It would be really nice if you could see the actual textures. Last, the "Environment" tab's options are very different in my version of the editor, several settings are missing, and yet the page states "last edited 6 years ago". So? Overly optimistic, or did those features get dropped since? I can only guess. Yes, and yes. Thank you!

Nothing: On a barracks, Shift makes little "5" appear on all icons, and when I hit Z it just makes my camera move forward...

And that selects automatically the current texture? Guys, this program really needs a documentation... At least a list of those impossible-to-guess features.

I think your idea is complementary to mine, but wouldn't help with my issue of "what was that texture I used right here?", given I use lots of them, and obviously a bunch of similar-looking ones (so they blend). I'm tired of trying to remember which grass or dirt or cliff this is, was it his one, or that one? Obviously what would help too is if the editor could display the actual texture, and not just a rectangle with the dominant color shade, but I guess that's a 32-bit memory limitation...

So depth is dependent on map size? All right, so this is a bug: On my "giant" sized Elephantine map the shores are steep - they are vertical. I emptied the water to check. Even small islets near a shore are but needles sticking out from the (very deep) river bottom. No chance to build a dock there... Could somebody with a "code" account please add a comment to D5132 that apparently giant maps (still?) have issues, and point them to this thread? Will try to make a second attempt on "giant", to see if this is constant or random (but tomorrow, today is a busy day).

I don't think it's a hotkey issue because as I said above, the unit icons do show a "5" when I press Shift, so at least this part of the Batch process seems to work as expected. If the Batch hotkey was changed to something else it wouldn't show that "5", would it.

Unit by unit works fine, but shift-clicking does nothing. When I press Shift it does display "5" over all units, but if I click on the little icons, nothing happens.

I don't see how I could have done that. I have copied + edited some template files, but even units I haven't touched don't batch-train. I haven't modified any code parts, I know my limits. Thanks for the screenshot BTW, it helps to know what it should have looked like... So, shift-click is indeed how it should work? Hmmm. I really wonder what happened.

I wanted to try batch training: Had lots of resources, plenty of population space, but when I shift-click (shows "5") on a unit type, nothing happens? Shouldn't there be a production queue appearing? Or a message, or something? I've tried it with several different units, on several different buildings, in several different games. Custom and stock units, standard and champion type ones. Whatever I do, shift-clicking on a unit button doesn't seem to do anything. What am I doing wrong?

In the "Elephantine" map you can't build a dock, the shore is too steep. So, how are you supposed to reach the island (and/or your adversary on the opposite bank)? I expected some Deus ex machina style trigger thingy, but I've reached the third age, have fully explored my bank, and am still unable to reach the Elephantine island. What am I missing?

Aw, with a17? Yikes, I'll spend a couple hours wondering what broke and how to fix it...

Sure it does exist! It's a stock file I've never touched (inside \public\art\materials). Anyway, for those who stumble upon the same problem, and find this thread some time in the future, the explanation is as follows: Standard units (not-champion units) need "<material>player_trans.xml</material>" Champion type units need "<material>player_trans_spec.xml</material>" Note the "_spec" part: It's specific to champion units.

Suggestion for the editor (Atlas): When you point the cursor over a landscape texture, the editor tells you which one it is. There are lots of similar textures, and they are a little all over the place, so sometimes I'm there wondering which one was this one. Unless I write a detailed log of all textures I used and where, I'm reduced to trial and (mostly) error... A feature where the editor tells you over which texture your mouse cursor currently is would be great to have, and make texture painting much easier. Just make it a small overlay in a corner, like the FPS thing.

I've got this recurring error: Each time I make a new unit art file I get this error at first. Even if the only things changed are a name. It's very annoying. While I've (somehow) always managed to make it go away, I never remember how, and I'd like to know what I am looking at: ERROR: Actor units/britons/infantry_axeman_e.xml255: required texture sampler specTex not found (material art/materials/player_trans_spec.xml) What is that error message talking about? And how do I make it go away? No, there is no nesting error, it's the first thing I checked. (Here is the end part of the \art\actors\units\britons\infantry_axeman_e.xml file throwing that error, in case you wonder:)

I don't like that idea too much, purely on a realism level: After all, in reality roofed rams were vulnerable to everything except ranged (arrows, stones, etc.)... In my own mod I solved the problem (kind of) by making rams slower, which gives you more time to react to them, but mostly simply by making fortifications a lot more resistant to hack & slash (The idea being that it is ridiculous that attackers can destroy a massive stone structure with swords and spears. That bugs me to no end, in all games doing that, but that's me.) Anyway, after those changes rams became much more to my liking: They are now less easy to employ, but now the only way to get past a tower/fortress. Using them becomes a challenging enterprise, not a mere formality. But that's my own tastes. I admit others would be bored to death having to whittle down fortresses instead of just steamrolling them. Thanks for your suggestion, but I think I'll stay with my solution.

How "clearly" do you want it? I'm making suggestions, not giving instructions. And it's definitely not "should be done". It's, if you don't mind, just my very own take on the problem, which I'm just quoting as potential inspiration for anyone interested. Yes, often borderline cryptic. Internet is a limited bandwidth medium where misunderstandings are easy and frequent, so, trying to make sure people understand you is IMHO worth some effort. I admit it doesn't look as good as throwaway remarks and spiffy one-liners... Ah, this. I have no opinion on this so far, it needs more testing to see if it does indeed change something in any significant way. I made a small specifically built (controlled environment) scenario for this, but didn't have the time to playtest it extensively enough. So far my first impression is "not enough", the British spearmen are still largely useless, but that is probably partly because in my own mod (I'm now used to), I've tweaked spearmen attack values (first age melee units somehow seemed incapable of killing a chicken), so I'm now used to more "decisive" battles. Going back to the endless poking before something dies is jarring. (Obviously I test your ram setting without my mod, which already extensively modifies rams and fortifications.)

I've been rambling on and on about it, again and again, last time 5 hours ago (see above), and you still ask? Or is that just a rhetorical question requiring no answer? What are you talking about? I reviewed your posts from the last 2 days and there is nothing there besides a vague suggestion to "improve" (improve in what exactly?). On all the rest I've already answered, but apparently you don't read my posts, to judge by your question above.

Didn't say it was, what I meant is that as long as I don't throw a tantrum because my favorite feature isn't implemented yet, I think it is okay to talk about things "which would be nice to have, eventually, if possible, etc.". Call it brainstorming. After all nobody can think of everything himself. Didn't try elephants yet, but I'd be tempted to agree: A charging elephant must be very efficient -- and quite terrifying too: Elephants should have a (short range!) enemy malus aura, especially against civilizations not used to beasts this size. Imagine people without TV or books, for whom the biggest animal existing is a horse, suddenly seeing an elephant! Must be a traumatic event... Sure, but also very different, because the priorities are very different: It's not about being fair to both players, it's exclusively about giving the human player an interesting challenge. ("Difficult" if you can't manage "interesting", but that's really just the last resort choice.) One could say the requirements are contradictory, and it wouldn't be totally wrong. The challenge is finding a good compromise... I too think gameplay is more important (but I think you got that by now... ).