Forums

Whenever I open the in development game, I get this

The description makes it seems as the Greek gate was not that weak. Pure speculation on my part, but i think the boulder might be loosely based on real breaching tactics (in reality with logs or maybe even axes, but in the poem one hero with a huge rock is enough). The descriptions of the rock being narrower on one side, Hector having to gain momentum to strike, part of the Trojan force climbing the wall while the rest walked through the gate. There is also the theory of the Trojan horse being loosely based on some forgotten bronze age siege engine, but i'm not so sure of it.

What was the purpose of the siege ladder, to help "capture" the fortified area?  For now could you extrapolate that into a tech that gives them for capture attack?

Hey there,  I´ve been thinking about ways to improve the team vs team gameplay and I came up with something probably very obvious but still not implemented in the game. I was thinking, that being able to place certain buildings in your teammates area or at least being able to connect walls could be extremly usefull. Just think about the map "2 seas" wouldn´t it be extremly cool to be able to build a huge wall along your teams territory without being forced to expand your teritory along the whole lenght of the map?  Being ablet to connect your own with your teammates walls would also lead to a much more safe defense as when you try to build your walls as close to eachother as possible. And it wouldn´t only benefit if you want to build crazy line defense. It would probably also lead to a greater variety of nations being played in pvp. The reason for this would be that buffs that a certain nation has, e.g. Cushites, which posses the Great Pyramid or the Small Pyramid, can not only be used for oneself, but also for the whole team, which would give the whole team an immense buff in comparison for to what they may lose by picking a weaker nation. And yes even though there are only 3 nations with buildings such as the Small Pyramid (Cushites, Mauryas and Iberians) it would benefit them and allow more interactions between you and your teammate. (Maybe you can add the Romans if you add the building "Via" which gives units walking on them a buff in their speed) Now lets face the problems: 1. Being able to place anything in your mates territory could also mean that you can place a barrack close to his civic center, switch teams and kill him. The solution would be that you can only place buildings in your teams territory when you play fixed teams. 2. How can I make sure, that my mate dosen´t trolls me by blocking of all my space? Here are two solutions either you can disable the function before starting the match or you can disable it in the match at any give time. 3. Wouldn´t it be broken if my team would be able to place e.g. their barracks in my territory, so they can always produce units when I am under attack. As it saves them a lot of time and is way safer then walking to me with their units? (And also it would be basically be the same as one player but with three heads (I think you get what I mean) And I agree, its a valid concern but I think this could be fixed by not allowing every building to be placed in your teams territory (e.g you can place the Great Pyramid or maybe even a tower, but not a barrack or houses) I hope it wasn´t too much of a burden reading my post and let me here your oppinion  

Also, all this could be kind of connected to something I mentioned before in https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/124829-a-call-for-umbrella-factions/#comment-758892: The Archaic period mentioned (800-480 B.C.) would be the last two phases here, starting with the rise of the city-states (which are actually small regions, by "Athens" in vanilla one should understand the whole Attica) and continuing with important colonies that continue independently (Syracuse in this example). The Mycenaeans would span from around 1700 to 1150 BC, while the Greek Dark Ages would correspond to the second phase. The diagram tries to represent how people identified themselves, and when dialects were first attested (Mycenaean being first), but not how they are related between them (thus, this is an attempt to a civ/tribe/city-state tree, it's certainly not a linguistic tree). The Greeks would keep identifying themselves with their tribes/dialects, but this didn't mean much regarding alliances (although some cultural similarities could be singled out for gameplay purposes).