Leaderboard

I'm sorry I have to post criticism, but well. Here we go: How about you create a gameplay concept before calling people to test it? I just downloaded the newest alpha, and gameplay wise there is almost zero progress. Yes, I've noticed there is more content in the game, the game runs smoother compared to before and animations etc. work better now. But this kind of progress doesn't change the fact that It's still an AoE II clone with too much micromanagement on the wrong stuff. Sure, you can capture stuff now, and that's better than I've initially expected it, but that doesn't change the fact that there are inherent flaws in the core gameplay that NEED to be adressed. Those are : - Citizen Soldier system - too much focus on booming - all units available from the start - unflexible teching - economy management -> army transition feels weird (indirectly connected to Citizen Soldiers) - no "red line" in the game which created tactical/strategical depth (indirectly connected to unflexible teching and Citizen Soldiers) These points have been brought up numerous times in the past, yet still there's nothing done about it at all. I really hope someone wakes up and actually takes on the problems the the game mechanics, because art and content are not the major part of why strategy games are played.

I would say it's more like a café keeping a type of cookie on the menu, even if it's similar to other cookies, and even though shelf space etc limits the number of different types of cookies. Is it a good idea or a bad idea? I'd say it depends on whether or not enough people like having access to that type of cookie. And the same applies to the factions in the game, do enough people like to have that variety in the Hellenistic factions? And is it possible for them to be different enough to make them interesting to play? I don't know, but as far as I can tell people do appreciate the variety they add to the Hellenes. If anything it's the opposite I'd say, it's during the Alpha phase we can afford to be flexible. That said I would say that it is (i.e. at the moment, and depending on the people in the team and current opinions) the team's decision not to add any more factions for part one at all. But as with everything else it could change at a later date. I do however think that it is a good idea to be very strict with changing things on this level, especially since we are getting close to Beta. If we remove factions people are going to get disappointed, work that has already been put into them will be wasted, and since all limits are at least somewhat arbitrary there is some merit to staying with the ones we already have decided upon. Otherwise where do we draw the line? There has been plenty of arguments as to why the Iberians should be split up into at least two factions if not more. At the very least the author of Delenda Est has argued for adding another Hellenistic faction: the Thebans, and I do recall someone else arguing for having some other Hellenistic factions as well. There are plenty of other factions which could be added, of them it's probably the Scythians which are the most interesting imho. It is impossible to make a perfect decision though (there will always be someone who is disappointed, and arguments as to why you should have made a different decision), so the question is where do you draw the line and say "these are the factions we are going to include". I think it's better to have the focus gained from not having to consider the question again, and again, even if it does mean that we might be missing out on some interesting factions.

To me the main reason why we're keeping all these Hellenistic factions is to not throw away the work that's already been done. I personally would probably have preferred to have fewer Hellenistic factions, and perhaps add one or two others, but it's not really the matter what I or anyone else think personally. What matters is what makes sense for the game, and from a development point of view. To me it's hard to argue for adding more factions as it's a lot of work even maintaining the ones we have and make sure they are as interesting to play as they can, and will be as balanced as they can be. I still don't think it's a good way to go to remove factions we already have though. Both because that would mean that the work put into them would have been wasted, and because we have said that the game will include these civilizations. Sure sometimes you have to change things, and remove things, even though you have said they will be included, but to remove something just to add something else instead doesn't seem like a good way to go. While I sometimes do use the word civilizations as well I prefer factions as the word civilization has some problematic connotations, i.e. is a group of people more or less civilized, or for that matter how do you define exactly what group of people is a civilization. A faction is simply a group that's been set apart as a unified group for this game, so it doesn't carry the same problems.

The team can have whatever faction they want... Nope. Not sure how you can come to the conclusion that removing civs can reflect more diversity. Having individual civs, instead of "paths" allows for showing more uniqueness right from the start of the match. Easy example is Macedonians and Spartans and Athenians, who are much different from the start of the game, at least as different from each other as they are from non-Greek civs. With "paths" you lose this. With mods like Delenda Est, this is magnified even more. Also, chill out. Mods like Delenda Est and Terra Magna are adding many civs, like Han Chinese, Kushite Africans, and possibly Nabataean Arabs and Scythian Nomads. Some minor talk have been said about including some of these with the game as a proof-of-concept for modding. Game is in alpha, need I remind everyone.

it would be good to see how many worker are currently working on each resources. like: food: 25 wood: 22 stone: 12 metal: 20 that would be really helpful I think great game btw!

@feneur: one should pin that answer as it's probably the most asked question ;-)

First thing formations are NOT turned on so they just do not work yet period where working on it it's a pathfinder issue till then trying to move 95 units at ounce will put your CPU into overdrive and the display lags big time while it tries the calculate where each @#@!## unit is and wants to go to next while figuring to make sure gets to the attack point on the map it's heavy duty math lad it take time and finding more efficient algorithm just is hard then coding the thing and please remember this an Open Source project we'er all volunteers and most us have a life Enjoy the Choice

> Disable the tech for the first two player and not the last two Could be done from a trigger script, not that hard actually. I don't like it, but the wooden tech was really bothering me when playing and removing it feels like polishing.

Based on how good it looks, I think it's worth it. I don't think we'll have that many cobras on a single map for it to be an issue anyway. The peacock has a similar animation with its tail feathers. The new animations look great.

Try again now. (You are only allowed to register one account per hour)