All Activity

Based off of one of the articles you sent, it sounds like most Perioeci were still equip as hoplites. That's why we gave helots both jav and slinger options. We have cretan archers but not until p3 i dont think. And theracian peltasts available p2.

I suggest you open a ticket for all these name changes in the gitea @Vantha or @wowgetoffyourcellphone might help bring these changes to life

For Sparta, helot slingers seem fine, for javelineers being Perioeci instead would be possible, but maybe you wanted to keep them as weak as possible. Mercenary Cretan archers later on are also a possibility, which could balance what should be their weak cavalry and very slow infantry, but fast when forming up. For Athens, as proposed, just substitute slingers with archers, which is very important considering the literature quoted (in particular that archers "were usually mercenaries, often from Crete, but Athens was an exception. The Athenians had native foot-archers"). In Part II I'll mention I think they should be a somewhat "fast" civ early on (for Greek standards), in contraposition to Sparta.

@Thalatta as the self proclaimed biggest worshipper of Athena im hurt you did not ping me into this topic before

This is a Replay of 4 Petra Bots on this Map-Version "Rome-with-Crossing12b". All bot settings are: "Very hard, balanced". It is here as a riddle. There is no winner determined yet, although the outcome is pretty clear. But the question is: "Why is Rome not defeated yet?" I will post the solution in some days.... took me also some time to figure it out. PS: It is not always the same bot winning. It depends a lot who is the first running into a crossed-T, like "Gallic Invader 1" at Min 14. Sure this makes a huge difference. Well the first uploaded files were wrong, they were the replay of my research to solve the riddle. metadata.json commands.txt

I'm sending a message in a bottle out to sea. Hey everyone, I'm working on a campaign for 0 A.D. called Burning Heart. I want to brainstorm a cover for it. Not an Age of Empires 2 copy, but something with that same vibe, that feeling of power in the image. Anyone down to collab on this? That'd be great.

Okey, I restarted upping this map a little further. So here is a recent version with in total 4 cross-points over the Tiber, which changes the character of the "battle of the Tiber map" even further. In the original it was mostly: "All against Rome" which has the worst starting conditions, why I started to work on the map .Now with AI everyone is more or less fighting his neighbor. Is it possible to add setup options on a scenario map like the "balanced" Button on Mainland balanced? I would like to have some option eg. some different setups of treasure? Rome-with-Crossing12b.xml Rome-with-Crossing12b.pmp

Not sure what I was thinking yet. I mean for helots: "Helots have 25% less range, wider spread, and 10% less damage than normal citizen infantry, but the same gather rates as civilians. They have 75 HP and cost only 40 food and 10 wood or stone. They do not receive forge techs." Sparta has both "javelineers" and "slinger" helots, the Javs are not peltasts though (no shields.) Athenians have Peltats, Slingers, Thracian Peltasts and Rhodian Slingers. Way back when we removed slingers and added archers, so have some of the framework for that. I may still keep regular slingers as an option too to unlock, but the archers would come standard. These are the things I like to discuss on discord So even though its pretyt dead, maybe you could join and we can go back and forth with these things and @ThePoshBarbarian Is welcome too!

First, champions is quite a misnomer. One would be hard pressed to find elite troops being called like that in any serious source. They are usually called, well, "elite". There's of course the issue that ranks are "Basic", "Advanced" and "Elite", the first two again terms that one will basically never find to describe how experienced units are. I think better would be "Recruit", "Seasoned" and "Veteran", all terms I've come across multiple times in sources. Second, what about ships and engines being able to be "champions"? One could make use of elite triremes for Athens for example, instead of making up things that weren't characteristic for them. I guess the main point of champions is to indicate that organic units do not work, but I think there's also a "good unit" implication being made that could be useful for a few inorganic units (they could also have some particular restriction or characteristic, like auto repair? Repair only at Dock/Arsenal? No repair? Whatever is balanced).

@Emacz you can always launch a missile more ineffectively. But what is it that you are thinking, exactly? What would be your Spartan and Athenian ranged units roster? The helots you are talking about are already psiloi, while trained Athenian "archers (toxotai) and lightly armed troops, generically called psiloi" (Dahm). Some sources (like Elliott and Rawlings) make a distinction between psiloi and peltasts, probably because of the latter's shield.

I have a lot of suggestions, i think i will start with Cimbrii (i'm tired and will continue later) I think spears could probably still be available, it was largely the most important weapon for all germans (and the Cimbri are described fighting in formation) Bows are not mentioned in any sources about Cimbri, but seem to appear in some Scandinavian finds (maybe could be auxiliaries instead). There is no evidence of greaves for Germans Shields could have a wooden spina, possibly wicker shields for skirmishers in first tier (but the later is a bit of speculation) I'm not sure they would have had that many Scandinavian auxiliaries (the Cimbri were already from Denmark so i assume you mean Norway or Sweden) Volcae and Helveti allies are more attested. Maybe they can have these in an allied camp instead or all German civs can recruit allied units from the Great Hall or similar building (with regular champions on the fortress). Also no evidence for German tattos in this period. Suiones and Rugii appear in later sources and dont seem to have joined the Cimbri The Scandinavian archers could maybe be included as allied units (if you want the civ to portray the larger region) but probably not champion. Infantry champions could be the Cimbrian front rank infantry who fought chained to each other probably champion spearmen since they did this to not break rank. They could also have swordsmen (A mix of single edged german swords and Celtic swords are found in Denmark) Maybe even some sort of champion axe raider as well like the current Germans(perhaps Ambrones, since at least their women used both axes or swords). Most plausible helmets would be Montefortino or Coolus Manheimn types Description of priestess For the cavalry we have the following description the helmets seem to have been decorated with animals (probably figurines like the ravens and boars on some celtic helmets) Breatsplate are almost certainly chainmail (Celtic influence, maybe captured Roman armor as well), and the long swords are probably Celtic style. Maybe replaced Caesorix with Lugius (little info on both, Lugius died in combat and Caesorix was captured). So my idea for Cimbri rosters (excluding possible allies)would be: Citizen Spear infantry (framea) Citizen Sword infantry (single edged sword) Citizen javelin infantry Citizen slinger? Citizen javelin cavalry Citizen spear cavalry (not much evidence for axe cavalry) Champion Cimbrian spearman Champion Sword infantry (Celtic sword) Champion Ambrones raider (axes and clubs) Champion Cimbrian sword cavalry Champion seeress Tacitus' Germania: https://topostext.org/work/676 Plutarch's biography of Mariushttps://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Marius*.html Strabo's description of Cimbri https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Strabo/7B*.html

I have thought about some of these things for Classical Warfare AEA. Was easy with Sparta, we classified them as helots and changed their stats a bit. The question for Athens (and I would think Thebes too?) If we were to lower their cost, how do we "penalize/balance"? Say a Javelineer for greeks was only 30 wood (20% cheaper overal) The Javelin would probably still do the same "dmg" right? It wasn't like they used weaker, less effective javelins? And we have "Athenian Peltasts" and "Boiotian Pelatasts" along with the Theracian merc.

This is a very valid point. After all, in the game, it's mainly tech trees and how they look like what differentiates the various civs. This is material culture, not so much geographical origin or ethnolinguistic classification. Of course, since that is quite important and one wants to be accurate, the situation should be noted somewhere, and if eventually a progression through different civs is made, that tree should be determined by their apparent origins, and both things would come into play.

-El problema ya está resuelto , gracias por su preocupación @Genava55. jajaja Disculpe las molestias ocasionadas jajaja

-En el equipo de desarrollo hemos estado tiempo hablando de crear minifacciones para el mod. eso podría resolver muchos de estos rompecabezas... -La primera idea en el mod, cuando nos encontramos con toda esta diversidad de tribus es : Crear una facción , con la tribu más poderosa ,influyente , populosa etc... Si se puede: Mezclar elementos de las tribus menores en las unidades , edificios y bonus con la principal. Si no se pueden mezclar:Incluir las tribus menores como auxiliares o mercenarias y algún edificio propio. Ejemplo: Aquí pueden ver como incluí las tribus menores: (Las unidades aún no están creadas) -¿Qué opinan? -¿Qué tribus germánicas del 500 a.c-100 d.c creen que serían necesarias de incluir , sustituir o eliminar? Disculpen las molestias*

@Lopess I think you both need to talk and come to an agreement.

Buenos días o tardes: -Ha habido un error. La cronología del mod Endovélico es del 500 a.C-1 a.C haciendo varias excepciones hasta el 100 d.C porque en el juego oficcial aparecía Boadicea.Pueden comprobarlo en el segundo link justo al principio de este foro en el comentario de lopess. Disculpen las molestias*

I thought splitting civilizations by material culture might make it easier to differentiate them, although i do agree it might be not be the most accurate option.

It is only archaeological, based on the pottery. Are the pots the best way to describe a people? The Goths seem to came from Scandinavia but their material culture is not really from Scandinavia. Furthermore, as I said, the Rhine-Weser Germanic culture is appearing at the end of 1st century BC. So, where are they coming from? Is it a local evolution or the spread of the Germanic peoples?

The map i found seemed to be putting them in the Rhine, hence the doubt (i think the map uses archaeological cultures). https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/2027476111148343343.html Perhaps originally Elbe Germans absorbing elements of Rhine cultures or the opposite (i even recall them being placed on the North Sea group in an earlier thread).

Elbe Germanics or Herminones https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbe_Germanic The relationship between the Vandals and the Lugii is a mystery but modern scholars generally assume they are the same people. Maybe Vandalic was the name of the branch and the Lugii were a specific people. The manuscript from Pliny seems corrupted on this part. The Istvaeones are not listed. It seems Pliny considered the Cherusci were Elbe Germanics. The Cherusci are not listed as a contribution to the Franks by Gregory of Tours. There is only Venantius Fortunatus (c. 530–600 AD) suggesting that but he is considered dubious because he mentions the Saxons as well.

Like i said previously it is a very big grey area that may well cause issues with the license in the future (or even now, i'm not an expert). I was not advocating for it.

@ThePoshBarbarian to be ekdromos (one that runs out) is a role, like is to be prodromos (one that runs ahead). Light infantry (the skiritai being a common example) could work as ekdromoi, to be ordered to break formation during certain points in a battle to perform some more auxiliary task, like skirmishing. Light cavalry would usually work as prodromoi, that is, scouts, and could include skirmishing (something normal for those who are running about!). For example, take this small fragment from Xenophon's Hellenica 4.5.16 (https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0032.tlg001.perseus-grc1:4.5.16): "οὐ γὰρ ἕως ἀπέκτεινάν τινας αὐτῶν ἐδίωξαν, ἀλλὰ σὺν τοῖς ἐκδρόμοις ἰσομέτωποι καὶ ἐδίωκον καὶ ἐπέστρεφον", which in the English version is "for they did not chase the enemy until they had killed some of them, but both in the pursuit and in the turning backward kept an even front with the hoplites", somewhat missing the literal meaning, which Google Translate keeps a bit better: "for they did not pursue them merely until they had killed some of their number; rather, maintaining a front level with the sallying troops, they both pursued and wheeled about". Thus, they should not be considered an actual unit. There's a "Prodromos" unit which is wrongly translated, I'll mention that in my Part II.

Huh, neat reads. Thanks for the info. Speaking of historically attested military words that may or may not have been used to describe actual formations/army structure, I've seen the words "light hoplites" (Ekdromoi, ékdromos [nominative], ekdrómōi [dative] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ἔκδρομος), referring to loose formation of hoplites wearing lighter gear/not wearing much armour (mostly reduced to their shield and a helmet) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ekdromoi, though from what I've managed to find so far in terms of references isn't too detailed.

For that, it may be fine, because it is very unlikely that it would use copyrighted stuff, but still, I think we should be careful But I don't think it can be under creative commons if we use ai