bstempi

The 90's called...

You're welcome

I left the old logos in place if you want a roll-back.

The two new files were put into place.

Just now beating 20, working on 10.

This service would place ads on our site. See this: http://www.wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=15435

I would think so. Direct IP communication doesn't work well through NAT'ing firewalls. The hosting party has to either be directly connected to the internet (no NATing) or has to open up firewall ports. No such thing needs to be done with several other games. By allowing someone to host a central server, the server can have the firewall rules or direct connection, while the clients are all behind their NAT'ing firewalls without having to make modifications. My suggestion was more like: C--.. ..--S | \ / C-----L-----S | / \ C--'' ''--SWhere C was the client, L was the lobby server, and S was some dedicated server. In TF2, Urban Terror, and other first person shooters, people can start dedicated servers. Those servers can choose to announce itself to the central lobby (thus making itself public) or to not list itself on the lobby (making it private). Dedicated servers could offer maps, run the AIs, etc. If a player is looking for a game, they could go to the central lobby to see what servers are available. They can find one playing a map that they like with the number of people they'd like, and then they can join that server and play.

Looks cool! I'll try playing this over the weekend.

I don't think I understand this -- I've never played any of the games that you mentioned . Could you elaborate?

I'm currently evaluating using the game (specifically programming AIs) as an educational tool. This topic interests me. I think having a central service is a good thing (it's a good starting point for finding other players, etc). I don't think players should be locked into this. I think it would be useful to have the ability to have private servers for clans or for large LANs (or for my students). I also think that even if we control the lobby and the game, we are still going to need to build a robust API . We're not going to want an upgrade of the lobby or the game to break people's ability to utilize either. It's also worth noting that just because the API is robust does't mean that the implementation has to be. If a robust API were designed, it could be incrementally implemented so that over time users see new features without having to worry about backwards compatibility. If anything, out implementation of such a think should serve as an example to others or should be independently runnable itself...sort of like the way that some games can operate in pure server mode.

There's no good way to solve this. The easiest thing is to simply disallow logins into the version of the forum that allows for users to make comments on new website posts. Other than that, there's nothing much we can do.

That's pretty awesome. Great work!

Where is this data stored, and where is the web service located? I'm interested in taking a look at it and possibly contributing.

I took the time to write a little entry on my blog about the upgrade process. I figured I'd share: http://www.brianstem...wildfire-games/

I'm currently trying to find a solution on my test server. This seems to be a pretty out-of-the-ordinary issue that we're having. I thought maybe that I missed some JavaScript when uploading the new forum files, but my diffs appear to be clean. I think we're having a larger issue.

This has been repaired.

Yeah, there are a few things that have to be changed in order for it to work correctly. If the website absolutely needs to be updated before Tuesday, you can log into the admin panel (/sitemanagementforum/admin.php) and edit the site URL so that it says wildfiregames.com/sitemanagementforum instead of wildfiregames.com/forum.

We're currently running 2 different installations: the old one and the new one. The "old one" runs the website. It can be located at /sitemanagementforum. Please note that the two installations are completely separate. They share no files, no databases, etc. If you change your password on the current forum installation, you'll still have to use your old password to update the sitemanagementforum.

Welcome, Daniel! It's nice to see that you're so excited about 0 A.D. .

Impressive!

Sounds like the start of a good game. Weaponized Vocals: Jerusalem Falls. There can be an edition for each dev's hometown.

I disabled the fancy water and shadows in-game. That created a noticeable increase in speed. After that, I compiled a release build. That didn't seem to make a difference. It's more playable, but slow enough that I wouldn't use it. Well, now that I know it's my machine, I know to try to play it somewhere else Thanks, Philip!

Has anybody tried running 0AD on a early generation Inet Mac Mini? I'm asking because I'm not sure if the game is running slow due to my OS or my graphics card. Graphics card details: bstempi@mini:~$ lspci | grep Intel | grep Mobile 00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/PM/GMS, 943/940GML and 945GT Express Memory Controller Hub (rev 03) 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/GMS, 943/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03) 00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 Mobile PCI Bridge (rev e2) I'm currently running Ubuntu 10.04, so I'm wondering if I'm just using a crappy driver or if I need to disable Compiz, etc. Any help is, of course, appreciated.

1 Machine running Windows 7 1 Machine running Windows XP Several machines running various versions of Ubuntu