Jump to content

Leaderboard

  1. Stan`

    Stan`

    0 A.D. Art Team


    • Points

      219

    • Content Count

      10,727


  2. Alexandermb

    Alexandermb

    0 A.D. Art Team


    • Points

      201

    • Content Count

      3,147


  3. LordGood

    LordGood

    0 A.D. Department Leader


    • Points

      108

    • Content Count

      2,659


  4. Sundiata

    Sundiata

    Community Members


    • Points

      83

    • Content Count

      1,930



Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 11/07/2019 in all areas

  1. 6 points
    I'm locking this topic because it's not getting us further. Feel free to state opinions on balancing that are not already mentioned elsewhere on the forum but please do so in a factual tone ideally proposing thought through solutions if at hand, thanks
  2. 5 points
    Stunning antler-like horse headpiece with matching breastcollar; Scythian, about 300 BCE, Hermitage Museum, St Petersburg, Russia. Steve Harrison. Museum piece
  3. 5 points
    @borg- what are your thoughts on making archers stronger but with a longer attack repeat timer taking around 10 or 15 seconds to aim + the rest of the animation in realistic human speed reducing attacking speed while increasing piercing damage? At this point from a Realistic view, they are like sharpshooters or guide anti-aircraft missiles aiming and firing in no time. Whitout mentioning the gattling guns of archer champions suchs as athen ranged champion.
  4. 4 points
  5. 4 points
    I noticed some good players don't make upgrades in good timing even when unharassed so I thought about discussing what would be the ideal ones. These are my raw calculations, it might be different depending on conditions (excess resources or being attacked). Also, not taking account ptols particularities. Starting the discussion with P1: wood and food are the ones you'll want to take, unless playing with slingers and taking stone, great hunt or extra berries, but the basics apply: If you have 30 gatherers, 15% bonus equals to having additional 4.5 workers, which assuming a mix of women and men (2 men, 2.5 women) equals 225 food, 200 100 wood. For their first gathering run, these workers would have brought you 45 resources. So for an investment of 250 resources, offloading the recruitment buildings (since you don't need to queue as much), you would get a 130 resources payback. Taking into consideration a generous 10% tax for walk time (if wood, food negligible) about 100 resources payback. Considering that the upgrade compounds with the scale (you get more benefit with more workers) I would put this as a ceiling when you would want to get the upgrade, having 30 workers gathering that particular resource. It could be argued that if you are not making mercenaries, you could even write off the metal cost, but I digress. This is assuming also that the upgrade happens instantaneously, otherwise we could take into consideration using 250 resources to build 2 men and a women or 5 women (if you could balance wood for food) which on their first run would bring about 20-50 resources (taking into consideration queue time). Even with these factors into consideration taking the upgrade seems to be a positive return. So in raw terms, between 40-60 pop in P1 would be the ideal timing to get both upgrades, food and wood. Stone and metal does not seem to be good upgrades to take in P1, unless unbalanced food for stone, but one could argue that taking cav could be a better option in some cases, if slinger/merc civ and having more than 10 men on stone/metal could also be worth it. Basket upgrade (5+ res cap per gatherer) seems to be a worthy upgrade for P1 only in maps with sparse wood, timing could be 100+ pop and only if a lot of excess resources since it's a costlier upgrade, calculations for the return on investment are tricky for this one. This first post is just about P1, but it's worthy to mention that if you are not taking P3 upgrades for wood and food as soon as possible and you are not planning a decisive timing attack in 1v1 or having to defend an all in, you are in heavy disadvantage (assuming a balanced matchup). One must take into consideration that having a higher rate of gathering means less men required to mine resources which can be in the front lines, defending while managing eco, or building fort/expand. This is not as relevant in P1 but for P3 the scale is too high to ignore.
  6. 4 points
    Marking this thread as mine.
  7. 3 points
    @borg- I tag you here so you read my proposal at the first post talking about a new artillery gameplay. I wonder if its reasonable what i have proposed and if its possible make huge ballista/lithobolos being build on battlefield instead of carrying it on a chariot. Gameplay speaking i need to split artillery in different clases. Boltshooter: Scorpion, Polybolos, Oxybeles. Good for killing infantry, this artillery should be able to be killed with arrows and slings and shouldn't be capturable, so you should use them for skirmishes and protect them as well. Stonethrower: Sling ammunation medium lithobolos/ballista. This should work well for fast siege deploy and ambushes with a decent range (Range should be about the same of a tower). Should also be killed by arrows and slings but this time allow to be captured. Heavy Stonethrower: Huge Rock thrower specially for siege towns from the distance. If its accepted that should be built on the battlefield whitout rotation i would do some meshes of the ballista being built. However this should require about half time of a Fortress. Why that? Well, you build a fortress with a full manpower and resources. If you are building a siege weapon on a battlefield that means time isn't your friend here being enemies able to see you will give them the chance to send the cavalry and destroy your ballista before its finished. The range of this one should be more than a tower. But this will have a decent amount of min range to give a chance of infantry and cavalry to destroy it before getting hited if they get closer. Stat speaking: I need to increase repeat time of stonethrower from 5000 to at least 7000-8000 in order to avoid visual glitches of siege artillery being shot faster. For Heavy stonethrower since it could be a new template this one should be around 10000 being slow but buffing the range and crush damage. Boltshooter will see if it doesn't shoot faster when i've done the first new light artillery.
  8. 3 points
    I've been thinking we could try uploading more of the replays. There have been many good games that are about to be forgotten. Sometimes it's hard to decide why a game should be considered special to upload, but it results in uploading none. If it goes on like this, ValihrAnt might run out of good games to comment on YouTube, and he might switch to some mediocre games, which would be sad. I'm not trying to claim that these two games are somewhat very special, but we don't play with original game settings much anymore. These two games are very low-pop games, which has the advantage of both little lag and highlighting of the team coordination. The player named TDB might not be the best experienced, but he showed a great intention to coordinate. Cesar did pretty well too, which he explained by the lack of lag, preventing extra brain lag. It doesn't happen often to be satisfied with the team coordination and not go all face palm about it. The second game ends a bit earlier because a player dropped, but we concluded that it was over at that point. 50-pop-3v3.zip
  9. 3 points
    Can't promise that. One of my goal is to split Pyrogenesis From 0 A.D. so that people can play whatever mod they'd like with Empires Ascendant and Empires Besieged being the two "Official Mods"
  10. 3 points
  11. 3 points
    Actually the engine does not allow it. The impact crater will disapear as quickly as the particles... And it cannot be attached to the projectile else you'd see it flying... So I guess we can call it a day.
  12. 3 points
    Happy to see movement in this direction, I played and spec'ed a few times and must say that the game flow seems much more nuanced and balanced. I am happy to help, whether adjusting parts of the code to patches or playtesting.
  13. 2 points
    I'm creating this thread to discuss how to make the mod stella artis : https://github.com/0ADMods/stella_artis/tree/master/art/textures/skins Ground Rules: It must play like StarCraft Three factions only Must be set in a futuristic (sci-fi) timeframe Two resources TODO: Find the names for all three civs Create the 3 civs.json Create the templates for all units and buildings Create the techs, auras and whatnot Define the building footprints for all civs (ex 4x4 5x5 2x2.. etc) so placeholder buildings can be used @Lion.Kanzen
  14. 2 points
  15. 2 points
    Sorry about the crappy logo.
  16. 2 points
    Congratulation on your victory! Your main issues are the following (in order in which they appear in the game): - you send your women to food collection, however, thanks to treasures, you have already plenty. So it would have been better to send some either to build your first house or to collect wood. - making bigger batch at the beginning would help you to grow your population faster, also, you are likely not to be rushed inthe first few minutes of games (especially by Petra, Petra is nice). Since women are trained faster than men, you can increase your population faster by training only women. - buildings should be always training units until max pop, it is important to start as early as possible to train in your cc; - for your wood collection, you might wait before making your first storehouse if you want to do something special with food. In this game, you won't be making fields anytime soon, thanks to treasure. Putting a first storehouse between wood and stones would have been nice. As brit you will want to have one there pretty early, so that one would have save some walking time to your units; Around 2:00 - you started to make your fields too early. You still had plenty of food in stock and the emergence for better growth was to get the ressources you needed the more: wood. Getting more wood fast would allow you to make the wood upgrade earlier and potentially a barrack too. The first one would improve your wood income that you needed and the second one would help you to increase your population faster; 2:20 - when you women get out of cc, they were iddle. Click on you cand define a rally point on wood so new units will never be iddled. You can always redicrect them if you are not busy when new units arrive; 2:50 - you didn't have enough houses. That 's probably one of the main issue when starting the game. It delays your growth a lot. Some players keep 1 or 2 women on "house duty". Those women will always be building houses constantly. Having a few too many houses can be a solution too. A last option is to use units already busy somewhere to tell them to build a house, and then shift+click to assign them a new task just after they completed the house construction. 4:50 - you might want to make your barrack slightly further away from cc so you could put another field in that exact spot. Putting that barrack just slightly further would be better. 5:00 - you can see some elephants with your cav. Use it to throw one arrow to each of them, taking care that the éléphants don't get to close to you cav and kill it. Bring back you cavalry unit to your cc, the éléphants will follow. Use your dog then to kill the elephants safely andcollect the free food once the éléphants are dead using the cav.This is a quite fast way to obtain food with no investment (you don't need to invest wood or food to produce). Making a few more cav can be usefull to gather the food faster. Calvarly gather food much faster on hunt than other units, this is why players use them for chicken instead of women. The same apply to other hunts type. 6:20 - you went for an early phasing up to phase 2. It is usually better to invest those ressources into more units to have faster income. Also, economic upgrades are very important, especially the woodand food one. Pay attention to have your building continuously producing units. 6:30 - I noticed that you chose to put all of your houses in the same spot. Often people prefer to put them all around the field. So that in case of attack, you can "ring the bell" from cc. The Women then run to the closest house, which would then be quite close. You might also want to build houses in such a way that they would slow down an attack with sieges going to your cc and take the role of "natural obstacles" for enemy soldiers that would have lower range than your slingers (it is not the case here since you have archers as enemy) 12:00 - you have already plenty of wood in storage, you might want a second barrack to produce soldiers faster. Also you can notice that on this map, you have not so much wood available. It would then be a good idea to adjust your army composition to available ressources on the map. Replace skirmishers by slingers since those cost less wood and you have a second stone spot. Think about making a temple to train priest later. Those only cost wood, and can help you to save some soldiers later. Cavalry could also be an option to get a good military power at a low cost in terms of wood. Spearmen cost wood, but they have more armor and they can be used as meatshield later in game. They will help you loose less sligners an indirectly make you save some wood too. 14:00 - You might also start thinking about making trade with yourself to be sure yyou don't run out of wood later in game at this stage. 16:00 - you keep producing women. Usually about 50-60 women is a good number. You mainly use women for food production since htey are mor eproductive there. Then you also want to spread a few of them everywhere you have men working too. They will give your men a 10% speed bonus. However on this particular map with few wood, making so many women can be seen as an ok strategy since it gives you the possibility to increase your pop faster. You should also have made enough building by now to be able to phase to p3. 17:00 Notice ho your barrack became annoying for your women, they have to go around it everytime they want to bring back food. You should consider making a farmstead near the field which are not next to the cc, so women don't spend so much time walking back. 18:00 - Notice how much extra ressources you have saved , you should find a good way to spend it (more barracks, more soldiers, a new base forward, phasing p3+making fort, more upgrades...). 20:00 - For battle, it is usually better to get units in order. Formation could help you for that. You want melee units which have a better armor to receive projectile while range units target the enemy. You also want to group all your unit sbefore starting to fight so all fire at the same time. This will help you to kill faster the enemy and therefore receive less damage from the enemy too. 22:00 - you could collect the wood along the river simply by making a dock. You would reduce a lot walking time of your workers 27:00 - when attacking, it is usually better to bring with your sieges weapon to destroy building: rams from your fort. You could destroy towers while your soldiers kill units. Retreating was the best decision. On your final fight, notice how Petra send its units one by one. With a good army size, well grouped, you can easily win the fight even if in the end you would be outnumbered. You can probably improve a lot at this stage by trying to improve on your eco. Good players playing Brits can usually get to: - 100 units before minute 8 - 150 units before minute 12 - 200 units before minute 15 Keep those numbers in mind to try to get an idea about how good you are doing with your eco. The main factors slowing down eco are usually: - forgetting to make houses; - not constantly training from buildings (you can select all your units production building and do "CTRL+2", this would allow you then to monitor more easily whether your building are producing or not by simply pressing "2") - having iddle units. using SHIFT to queue more actions is the best way to solve this problem without too much stress; The link provided to you above is quite good. You have also plenty of enterntaining videos on YouTube. You can also get easily some advice while playing online. hf! P.S. Also, if you see a truck driving near you, keeping a safe distance if possible.
  17. 2 points
    See what I mean? @elexis plz
  18. 2 points
    Nobody denied your right to talk. If you make patently untrue claims, then I am also allowed to disprove them. This is a lie. All of the architecture referenced was built by Kushites during the Napatan and Meroitic Periods. The only element that was originally Egyptian were those small chambers in the back of the Amun temple of Napata. Everything else is Napatan or Meroitic Period Kushite construction. I posted well over a hundred sources (most of them academic) and I even shared a PDF in the previous page, written by, among other specialist, Dr. Timothy Kendall, discussing the history and archaeology of some of the main temples and palaces at Jebel Barkal. Dr. Kendall is "a fellow at Harvard University's W.E.B. Du Bois Institute and an expert in Nubian Studies, served as associate curator of the Department of Egyptian and Near Eastern Art at Boston's Museum of Fine Arts, and developed the "Kush: Lost Kingdom of the Nile" exhibition for the Brockton Museum, vice president of the International Society of Nubian Studies" and director of archaeological excavations at Jebel Barkal between 1986 and present. I'll take his word over yours any day. If I wanted to share Egyptian temples in Kush, I would have shared New Kingdom Egyptian temples like the temples of Soleb, Abu Simbel, Derr, Amada, Aksha, Beit el Wali or Wadi es Sebua. But I didn't! I focused entirely on those structures that were built by Kushites in Sudan during the Napatan and Meroitic Periods. I even tried to avoid Lower Nubia, on the Egyptian side of the modern border, to avoid unnecessary confusion. As I already pointed out, Meroë and Napata were far greater in size than what is depicted in that render, and the size of the structures on that avenue aren't even exaggerated (you could argue that the platform for temple 300 is a meter too tall in relation to the structure, but then we're really nitpicking). The palace should even be noticeably bigger than it is, and there could be several of them, as was the case in the aforementioned cities. Not even those big statues in front of temple 300 are exaggerated in size...... One of the Colossi of Tabo (there's two of them, the same size): King Natakamani, early 1st century AD, Meroitic Kush, in front of the National Museum of Sudan in Khartoum: Yes, Kushite architecture had a lot in common with Ancient Egyptian architecture, this is hardly news to anyone on the forum. They shared a lot of history and culture, even since pre-Dynastic times. There is literally nothing Byzantine in this render. Then why do you share a picture of a vaulted ceiling from the modern day country of Ethiopia, if you could as well have shared a picture of a vaulted ceiling from Sudan? As early as Kerma Period, both of the main proposed reconstructions of the Western Deffufa have vaulted chambers: I actually remembered a stone vault in one of the tomb entrances at El Kurru. This would have supported a hell of a lot of weight (backfilled earth rubble): Most of the royal tombs were actually vaults cut from solid rock (Egyptian goddess, Isis or Mut on the left): Or maybe something like this Nubian example from the Nubian Museum in Aswan? Karanog is also Lower Nubian, currently Southernmost Egypt, but was a Meroitic governors residence. Because it's one of the youngest palaces on the list, and on account of the dryness of the area, this was the best preserved Meroitic palace, until it was submerged by Lake Nasser. On the left an archetype Nubian Vault. In the middle construction technique for an upper floor is shown and in the image on the right, it's hard to see, but there's a "great staircase" supported by that arch. Palaces and temples were invariably plastered with a white lime-plaster. Stone, mudbrick and fired brick elite structures would have all looked more or less the same from the outside. Not muddy. But smooth white (possibly with a yellowish patina building up over time, from the sand and rains). Also, I've seen examples of stone vaults as well... I couldn't be arsed to save them because I didn't think someone was going to be this dismissive of Kushite architecture. Next time I bump into the stone vaults, I'll let you know [edit: see stone vault above]. And why are you talking about ladders? They built staircases. Here's one from inside a Pylon of the Amun Temple in Dangeil: A lot of the palaces also have remains of staircases, sometimes more than one. I'm pretty certain it wasn't limited to royal architecture either. Kushite staircases could be quite monumental. Some of the subterranean staircases to the tombs of El Kurru, cut from the rock, are the biggest I've seen so far. This is not the case with our models. As I already said, I completely ignored pre-existing Egyptian architecture in Sudan for my references, even though Kushites did indeed maintain a good number of them. The wonder is based on temple 300 from Musawwarat es Sufra, Sudan, Meroitic Period, 3rd century BC, which I already pointed out in my previous post. It's not Egyptian! The palace is covered in lime-plaster and they often used fired brick for such structures, and no, the pylons of the Amun temple dominated the landscape. They did build awesome cities. Why compare it Rome and Athens? If you must, several Napatan and Meroitic temples were bigger than any of the temples that the Athenians ever built. In fact, the Amun temple of Napata was built centuries before the Classical Period had even started, when Rome had barely even been founded, and the Amun Temple of Dangeil was built over a century after Athens had been conquered by Rome... You know who wasn't conquered by Rome? Have you actually bothered to look at the size of the people in the references, both in the reconstructions as well as the aerial shots of the archaeological sites that I shared on the previous page? I know, it's hard to spot them, because they actually do look extremely small compared to the structures... Some of their temples were absolutely huge, why is that so hard for you to believe even when pictures of the remains of such temples are staring you in the face? Cognitive dissonance? I already pointed this out. They did have processional avenues linking the palaces, temples and Nile river. Here's some more bite-sized info since you weren't interested in Dr. Kendall's extensive description of the sites at Jebel Barkal. The Meroitic Palace and Royal City, by M. Maillot: https://issuu.com/sudarchrs/docs/s_n19_maillot Condescending and facetious. Rome was literally a village when Kushites were building monumental temple complexes at Jebel Barkal and other places like Kawa. One of the earliest examples of monumental Kushite architecture is the Western Deffufa in Kerma, dates to roughly 2000 BC, 1st Kingdom of Kush, Sudan. This is monumental architecture that predates even the rise of the Mycenaeans! And it's still standing... ^4000 years ago... These people have a long-lasting legacy of monumental architecture that predates even the Mycenaeans. These are the same guys that in conjunction with the Hyksos from the north, brought the Middle Kingdom to its knees. It really isn't. It's way smaller. Why do you give this guy any credit at all when it comes to a subject he admitted that he didn't have any expertise on, just one page ago. Appart from the balcony, he doesn't show any scholarly integrity whatsoever and has deliberately smeared me by claiming that I misrepresented Egyptian architecture as Kushite, even though I didn't, and even though I shared literature and sources by the worlds' foremost experts in the field disproving almost everything he said, and he couldn't even be arsed to read it. Might I remind everybody that this is the same guy who proposed a magnetically levitating statue for the Ptolemies as well as a mountain sculpted in the likeness of Alexander the Great as the Macedonian wonder. Even his references for the Ptolemaic towers aren't even primary references, but come from a Roman mosaic in Italy, full of actual fantasy creatures and monsters... I'm not even saying that there is something wrong with the tower, but I've always strongly preferred to use primary sources from the start. Now suddenly primary sources, like actual archaeology, can just be thrown out the window because some dude says he doesn't believe Kushites could build such stuff, based on literally nothing more than his own ignorance and biases...? Yes, the balustrade is incorrect. Pretty much everything else he said was nonsense.
  19. 2 points
  20. 2 points
    At 0:45 something that comes closest to gameplay
  21. 2 points
    https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/the-art-style-of-this-game/60981 So much cartoony. Look those weapons.
  22. 2 points
    Well, the artstyle really fits a certain theme. It looks appropriate to make a movie about gnomes or dwarfs, or whatever they're called.
  23. 2 points
    Middle ages seems. I dont like the art... Too phony... I really prefer 3. And I think that it's a bad decision calling it 4 (middle ages were done already)
  24. 2 points
    They're in, have a listen
  25. 2 points
    I sign up. I have trouble with my ISP atm. and have to play using my mobile connection, which is already at 50% of its volume for this month... These are dark times.
  26. 2 points
    Maybe I misunderstood, but there's a decent amount of variety in Hellenistic towers, including both square and round towers as part of the same fortifications (like the round towers of the gates of Perge vs the square towers on the rest of the wall). They both seem capable of housing artillery (bolt throwers at least): Sorry to sound contrarian, but Archimedes-tech-level Greeks were smashed by Romans, Parthians and Scythians. Of course we don't have Parthians and Scythians yet, but one day, one day, when we develop those civs we'll finally be able to check those pesky Greeks Either way, I think it's perfectly fine, even preferable, for the Greco-Roman civs to stand out in terms of artillery/siege and anti-siege. Those were some of their specialities and it makes those civs unique in that regard. Giving non-Greco-Roman civs Archimedes level tech would make those factions feel less than genuine. Just give everyone battering rams and be done with it. When and where there is evidence for more complicated siege equipment, then yes, let's do it, if not, then nah... Not really, no. The argument for siege equipment among the Mauryans and Kushites is based on their written histories which mention them in both cases. The freestanding towers are just a standard RTS convention but as i indicated, I don't think this should be extended to artillery towers. Let them be unique.
  27. 2 points
    I vote in favor. Better to take care of it now than wait and risk more issues/higher costs.
  28. 1 point
    I don't want it to be the same Starcraft story. At least the origin. Humans roam the universe for different reasons. The dictatorship could be good if the leader does not seek absolute power, just as the defenders of the oppressed could simply be anarchists. Let's add this as an ingredient of the human being out of curiosity, and to know secrets, as well as unconscionable and unethical scientific ambition. All this gives a cocktail of different alliances and enmities between them, as well as conspiracies and a couple of human faction that deviated from the route in their journey through the universe. Humans create (zerg) with his unnethical experiments, similar to Virus and biological weapons in resident evil. Humans are trying to reach center of universe but they need reach the other side opposite to old solar system where the earth was devastated.
  29. 1 point
    Sounds good. I wonder if that could be drafted in the github wiki. I'd like everyone to contribute
  30. 1 point
  31. 1 point
    I use Chrome / Edge Chromium. Check my page and you can see some recent gif there. Add some text. "Wait for attach video" Public share.done
  32. 1 point
    Yes, tomorrow I will post .cfg file. While starting the game.
  33. 1 point
    Well, in the context of the section it's more like "information" (English) or "Informationen" or maybe "Erkundung"/"Erforschung" (German). A I understand it the German "Spionage"(English "espionage" I guess, not sure, also "intelligence" I guess) is meant for gathering information about something a 2nd party explicitly claims to be information owned by it - and that doesn't really apply to e.g. resources on the map. However, I also stumbled across "Informationen sammeln". I lean towards "Erkundung" which might most closely be translated to "Exploration" in English.
  34. 1 point
    Created a ticket in case someone wants to pick up the task https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/5642
  35. 1 point
    I just don't like dread lords face. I liked more the "undead vampire" over the "demonic furry satyr" head
  36. 1 point
    You can make the Scarlet Macaw?
  37. 1 point
    Its not always about the rating, but quitters just wasting my time. If they don't want a rated game then they can say that before the game starts, or not play rated with others from the get go.
  38. 1 point
    Hi Stan, for next days, please: - wiki:Manual_SettingUpAGame - wiki:Manual_BasicGameplay - wiki:Manual_OtherFeatures - wiki:Manual_Quickstart_PlayedRTS - wiki:Manual_MainMenu - wiki:Manual_Buildings - wiki:Manual_Units - wiki:HotKeys - wiki:Manual_Terminology - wiki:Manual_Settings - wiki:Manual_Cheats and please take a look at wiki:Manual_Buildings. Is it right that there are links to pictures that are not visible? Andreas
  39. 1 point
  40. 1 point
    "Walk speed and run speed" if that is implemented and Goes well, 0.A.D have been wrong this whole time by not using running .
  41. 1 point
    Hello, For years I have been looking for an RTS that works with my mac computer, and this is EXACTLY what I have been looking for. Love the game, and can see it expand tremendously. I have a couple far out ideas I would love to hear discussion about. - Flora and Fauna surrounding waterbeds - Better Balance of the Difficulty sys. - Falling trees animation - Buildings can change depending on the age (Town, City, so forth) - Taller Palaces (I want to be scared when I see a Palace not get confused with another building) - Feeding grounds for live stock to keep them from roaming away - Personal Civilization where you can customize the look of your soldiers and Hero, and style of your buildings. - More team color options - Road formation between two adjacent buildings in a determined length - Variety of Statues for different groups so the same one isn't being built. - Bridges - Hero's have a glow to them to better define them on the battle field I have many more topics to discuss but These should be a good starting point.
  42. 1 point
  43. 1 point
    It was hot in that part of the world I guess, so having a little breeze might have been well... a breeze
  44. 1 point
    The first two balancing mods available. I have a lot more work to do, but I need to know what you think. Remembering that there is much that still needs to be done, fauna, siege engines, champ units, ships, etc. Mod 1: Cc can train only women. Units are no invincible and do not celebrate when rank. Mod 2: balance citizen units. it's important to test with both mods. I'm trying to avoid the bonuses, only when I see that it's really necessary. A summary of the units: Spearmen: Health 75, attack hack 6 - attack speed 1,25s, armour hack 3 - pierce 4, cost 50 food/50 wood, move speed 9.4, training time 10s, bonus 4x vs. cavalry. Very strong vs cavalry. Absorbs a good damage from ranged units. Composed with ranged units makes a great combination. Vunerable vs swordmen infantry. Swordmen: Health 65, attack hack 8 - attack speed 1,0s, armour hack 2 - pierce 2, cost 50 food/30 wood/20 metal, move speed 10,8, training time 10s, no bonus. All around unit, great vs spearmen. Vulnerable vs archers. Win battles against javelins and slingers if these units are unprotected. Pikemen: Health 90, attack hack 5 - attack speed 1,5s, armour hack 5 - pierce 4, cost 50 food/50 wood, move speed 7,6, training time 10s, bonus 5x vs. cavalry. Tank unit. Very good vs cavalry (alone, can be very vulnerable), great mixed with units with great attack like swordmen/archer. Archer: Health 60, attack pierce 7 - attack speed 1,15s, range 62, armour hack 1 - pierce 1, cost 50 food/50 wood, move speed 9.9, training time 10s, no bonus. All around ranged unit. In large number does great damage. Vunerable vs melee and javelin cavalry, slinger and javelin infantry. Javelin: Health 60, attack pierce 6 - attack speed 1,25s, range 32, armour hack 1 - pierce 2, cost 50 food/50wood, move speed 10.8, training time 10s, bonus 3x vs. archer. Quick unit, great for hit and run. Specific to counter archers. Can cause great damage if protected by pikemen/spearmen. Vunerable vs all cavalry (have bonus vs archer cavalry, may have problems against range). Slinger: Health 55, attack pierce 5, attack speed 1,25s, range 46, armour hack 0 - pierce 0, cost 50 food/20wood/20stone, move speed 11.3, training time 8s, bonus 2.5x vs. archer - 1.5x vs. champion cavalry (maybe vs champion melee infantry too). The ranged unit fastest, cheapest and weakest unit in the game. Great for hit and run. Very vunerable vs cavalry. Spear cavalry: Health 140, attack hack 7 - attack speed 1,25s, armour hack 3 - pierce 3, cost, 100 food/40 wood, move speed 16.0, training time 14s, bonus 1.8x vs cavalry (maybe a bonus vs sieges). Tank cavalry. Specific to combat other cavalry. Can do great damage vs ranged units. Expensive and slow. Sword cavalry: Health 125, attack hack 8 - atatck speed 1,25s, armour hack 2 - pierce 2, cost 90 food/30wood/20metal, move speed 17.0, training time 12s, no bonus. All around cavalry. Can cause damage to all types of units. Vunerable vs pikemen/spearmen and Spear cavalry. Javelin cavalry: Health 110, attack pierce 6 - attack speed 1,25s, armour hack 1 - pierce 2, cost 80food/40wood, move speed 17,5, training time 12s, bonus 3.0x vs archer - 1.5 vs. support. Fast and cheap cavalry. Specifies for harassment and vs archers. Very vunerable vs spear cavalry. Archer cavalry: Health 110, attack pierce 7 - attack speed 1,15s, armour hack 1 - pierce 1, cost 90food/40wood, move speed 17,0, training time 12s, no bonus. All round ranged cavalry. In large number does great damage. Vunerable vs pikeman/spearmen, spear/javelin cavalry. Let me know what you think. Tnx!!!
  45. 1 point
    Mostly are conventions, but some roles according loosely from history can be designed. BTW, I think that it's better to make the bonus not related to mainly specific units, but to armour classes: Because I love a middle ground philosphy design between AoE3 and AoE2 in units roles and civs distinction, I would love to have "special units" with some role/stats change, but without overcomplicate the design. Dogs could be one of this special units: I would make them good against workers and light infantry. If Britons are designed as a Rush civs, dogs could be a cheap and fast unit, to support infantry and skirmishers in p1 to harass economy, but later maybe they would be useless because cavalry.
  46. 1 point
    But still have problem with that cavalry if they catch them.
  47. 1 point
  48. 1 point
    I'll see what I can make tonight with A24. Your request should be fairly simple. The starting conditions will be nearly identical, so as to conform to your current tutorial script as best I can.
  49. 1 point
    @saavedra29 You can't make a unit run with a command yet. Anyway, you can see running units in 2 cases: 1) When a unit is in passive mode and is attacked 2) To enter in the formation that you created when they are far from it.
×
×
  • Create New...