All Activity

I think what the game needs most is campaigns, and people would be happy to make some if we had a world builder with more tools like triggers. Any chance that could be implemented soon? Also are there any tutorials on how I could do more with the current world builder?

If you block a mace with your shield it'd still hurt, that was what I meant about crush damage. Anyway how you describe it is pretty close to the current game and I'm fine with that. I'd like more variety between units, what you said about swordman and spearman fits that. We should give the swordman another hack armor and the spearman another Pierce armor.

You can block mace and axe attacks using a shield, but you can't really block the axe attack using your sword. By this logic, mace is a pierce weapon and axe is both a pierce and crush weapon. See how complicated this can get? Compare that to the following hypothetical situation: All melee units have a standard "Melee" attack type. All ranged units have standard "Ranged/Pierce" attack type. All siege weapons have standard "Siege/Crush" attack type. Units can have more than one attack type, which allows elephants and other specialized units to deal some Siege damage. Unit resistances are now scaled based on how they fare against certain attack types. So, a Hoplite can have high Pierce resistance and average Melee resistance. Swordsman will have higher Melee resistance, but he is weaker against Ranged attacks. Unless he is a Roman with a very large Scutum (thus, Romans naturally have better swordsmen). Immortals, being without big shields, can have high Melee resistance, but lower Ranged resistance, etc.

The player who chose Judeans in a TG be like: your CC was promised to me 3000 years ago! Jokes aside, this civ actually exists somewhere on GitHub or in Endovelico. Please take a look around and see if you can port it to R28

If they improve the world builder tools we should make a Maccabees campaign. I don't think Judeans are a big enough kingdom to be a civilization in the main game but we could make one for the campaign.

Like desert rose and perzival I prefer using hack, pierce, and crush damages to make some units have natural advantages against others and keep bonuses limited. The way I see it, from a unit's point of view pierce is an attack you need a shield to block, hack is an attack you could block with a sword, and crush is something you can only avoid by dodging.

A perdon, pense que era el mod que añade SOLO A LOS JUDIOS (Reino Hasmoneo)

Hello! Today I’m bringing some more updates about the development of my project World Rising. Over the past few weeks I have been studying animations extensively, and I finally managed to understand much better how they work within the engine. At first I tried to use some of the animals that already exist in the game, but I wasn’t able to adapt them successfully. Because of that, I decided to take a different approach: creating my own animals from scratch, including their skeletons and animations. Those who have been following the project already know that I am currently working on the Japanese flora before moving forward with the civilizations. Now it’s time to start developing the fauna as well. My goal is to create between 10 and 20 animals that represent different regions of the map. Among them, I also plan to include a legendary megafauna creature, inspired by animals that lived between 15,000 and 10,000 years ago. This creature would act as a kind of natural boss, providing a large amount of food when defeated by players. In addition, I have been working hard on improving the game's performance, reworking meshes, textures, and other assets to ensure players have the best possible experience during gameplay. For now, here is an image showing some of the animals I have created so far. They do not have animations yet, but they are already part of the process of building the game's ecosystem.

As far as I'm aware, there doesn't seem to be a way to cancel producing mass amount of units in a building, so my only choice is to manually click cancel and its annoying in multiplayer where input lag is present as well as mistaking a batch number or wrong unit, so solving it by a click of a button would be nice. I've made an issue already on github.

Yeah I was thnking about something along those lines, but then would need 6 templates for all merc units

Oh, for that, I am not sure. One kinda cheesy way u could do it would be to have the unit promote into new template, u could call it merc_inf_archer_a_pre.xml, which then features the upgrade capability to turn into merc_inf_archer_a.xml The downside is that the user wouldn't have a greyed out icon before they are able to pay the 10 metal.

Once they reach the experienced needed to promote to Advanced, I then want to have them "upgrade" to finish the process. Basically Merc dont recieved techs from forrge/wtf etc... they also dont rank up like regular "CS" they are gready MFs! They want more "gold" to fight harder

This is already possible, isn't? Can be done with characters like =P

You want it to promote upon upgrading? Or do you want the user to have the choice of upgrading by spending some metal vs promoting by letting the unit gain xp. If it is the latter, yes this should work.

Want to try something new with Merc in Classical Warfare AEA. I havent tried yet, cause I figuted I would ask before nubbing and creating errors. Can I write it so the Promotion is includeded in the upgrade? <Upgrade> <veteran> <Entity>units/athen/merc_inf_archer_market_a</Entity> <Tooltip>Rank up to veteran status.</Tooltip> <Cost> <metal>10</metal> </Cost> <Variant>upgrading</Variant> <Time>10</Time> </veteran> </Upgrade> <Promotion> <Entity>units/athen/merc_inf_archer_market_a</Entity> </Promotion>

Tiny precision, I wasn't trying to blame the process I saw how it works well to generate hardened quality code, the time reviewer spend to read your (sometimes sh!ty) code is never to be taken granted --thanks by the way @Vantha, @phosit, @Stan` for the reviews on my PRs --. But simply the additional time to be spent on trying to get any feature into the game (again the 1-2 order of magnitude larger of work isn't a exaggeration, add to this waiting time) create a very real limit to what you can get done, even over a large time frame. Your suggestions to try to organize the collaboration although nice, can hardly solve this dilemma.

@Atrik @wowgetoffyourcellphoneI want to touch on the recent discussion regarding our development workflows and how best to align our modding efforts with the vanilla codebase. I have read through both of your points and really appreciate the nuance around resource allocation and reviewer availability. The reality is that there are definitely valid differences between the timelines for mods versus full game integration, particularly when it comes to compliance and QA scrutiny. However, as we move forward on larger project deliverables, our goal is to streamline the process without sacrificing quality. I am proposing that we introduce weekly alignment sessions on Microsoft Teams to keep everyone synced with QA and product management. This would allow us to surface blockers earlier and ensure our technical direction remains aligned with the broader roadmap. Regarding the specific debate on mods versus pull requests, standardising our integration protocols can actually help bridge the gap you mentioned regarding reviewer availability. By centralising these reviews within a PR workflow, we create a more predictable pipeline for feedback and refinement before code enters the core system. This is a collective effort to improve how we scale our development operations. If we can establish these regular touchpoints and adopt a shared development standard, we should see fewer integration headaches and faster cycles for feature releases. I would love to hear your feedback on how you think we can implement this in a way that respects the workflow differences you are facing while still moving us toward greater consistency.

Same. However, offending people deliberately and expecting no punishment for it strange. If a player targets the other player's racial, ethnic or religious background, that player should be punished. Of course, we don't have to go to extremes and punish people for saying the f-word or just calling other people idiots in a heated context.

I’m not sure about this one, since someone’s idea of trolling varies wildly (you could consider anything from worker harassment to deleting captured buildings trolling, and both are commonly used tactics.)

I like the distributed farmers idea. There would be lots of gameplay ramifications for eco efficiency and vulnerability to raids. One outstanding point is the slot ("trees" as mentioned by @DesertRose) priority per farmers. Instead of some script that would place each additional farmer at the best possible slot depending on dropsite and farm orientation, slot prioritization should be done based off the path the farmer takes to access the farm when tasked to farm on it (whichever slot is closest).

I have a sanction idea that satisfies both sides of the argument but it is a bit difficult to implement technically: Every time JC says a racist comment, his units increase in cost by 20%. When he insults another player, his units loose 20% of attack damage. When he trolls, his units loose 10% max HP. The penalty changes depending on the severity of the offence.

That's not necessarily true. It's definitely a discussion we can have. Your other points are 100% fair. My main reasons for starting DE. Collaboration, especially online collaboration, can be very frustrating at times. But what you can do (which you've already done and which I've done) is use your mod for experimentation, etc., then parse out bits and pieces you think would serve well the base game and make PRs.

It's a bit more complicated then that however. It's not just about good will. There are things that I can do in a mod that won't be accepted in vanilla, like dropping support for minuscule screens. The time spent on developing anything for vanilla is of a large order of magnitude (often even two) longer then for a mod, due to requirements, process, need of communications.. Reviewer availability is scarce and mismatch with your own motivation and availability creates a even bigger gap between making something in a mod and for vanilla. Some ideas are very often initiated in the mod as a totally buggy POC, and refined over time since you can immediately play test it (or dropped). Which is something you cannot really do with vanilla.

That's actually something I wanted to say, but I feared that the walking distance is too small to replace the 10% diminishing return.

Merged. Thanks @nifa! I'll work on the Erechtheion and Caryatids Pull Request next.