Palaxin

Community Members
  • Content count

    131
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

99 Excellent

1 Follower

About Palaxin

  • Rank
    Sesquiplicarius

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

998 profile views
  1. Must be r19211. The wooden tower templates have been renamed.
  2. @LordGood is currently working on Zapotecs, which could be merged with the existing Rise of the East mod (see the discussion in the screenshots thread). Actually the Kushites (in the far south) would be a logic addition to the Hans (in the Far East) and Zapotecs (in the far west), at least in respect of most civilizations featured in 0 A.D (see also LordGood's post).
  3. @tmm88 thanks for your many tracks! I think you definitely have the potential to contribute great music to 0 A.D., I still agree with @av93. Additionally, I think in many of your tracks (at least the earlier ones, I couldn't listen to all) there is no clear climax. There not necessarily needs to be one, but personally I like it when you feel tension which suddenly breaks at a certain point. However, regarding music I'm only an average person. It would be great to get some expert advice from @OmriLahav, but AFAIK he has been busy recently. Edit: here is an example; tension builds up from 2:25 and is released at 3:03 (climax), another climax e.g. at 4:35 Edit 2: as you can see, I love epic music
  4. @Lion.Kanzen Perhaps you can tell @soloooy0 that he should avoid posting literally the same in two threads (see Siege Weapons Many Changes Ahead) and write in English? If he is not comfortable writing in English, I suggest to add at least a machine translation to the Spanish version.
  5. Actually percentage bonus (I will call it relative bonus) is clearly better than integer bonus (I will call it constant bonus). Which is pretty OP for very weak units (high bonus in relative strength) and pretty useless for very strong units (small bonus in relative strength). Balance is not touched if relative strength between weak and strong units stays the same, which can only be achieved by relative bonuses. However, balance between weak and strong units is shifted with constant bonuses because weak units profit better from them. Why? Because strong units usually are proportionally more expensive than weak units (this is the most simple explanation, but I could dig deeper if you wish so). Let's say there is strong type of unit A and a weak type of unit B. A costs 100 resources, B costs 50 resources and A is twice as strong as B (a well balanced game manages to link unit strength and costs similar to that, of course it is not always pure combat strength which is taken into account, but also e.g. speed, gather rate, ...). Player 1 used 100 resources to train unit A and player 2 used 100 resources to train two units B. If we would apply constant bonuses now, the two units B would each receive the bonus, though player B only invested half of the resources for each of the units B, whereas there is only one unit A which gets the bonus. Consequently, unit A which has double the strength of the units B, but also double the costs, needs to receive double the aura bonus in order to maintain balance. This is achieved with relative bonuses. I hope this is clear. As explained above, it must be this way. The gap is not widened, it only seems so. The absolute difference of the stat XY between a weak and a strong unit is increased, however the relative difference of the stat XY remains the same. But the stronger units always are more expensive than the cheaper units. Please do not. I actually waited for relative bonuses and with the exception of armor (because it doesn't work linear, but exponentially), IMHO all techs and auras should only use relative bonuses in order to avoid balance shifts. At least from a mathematical point of view I'm convinced that this is necessary. Regarding the spelling changes in r19052 I do not always understand the logic: It is not clear when to use capital letters and when not. I suggest to not use capital letters at all since it is easier and more correct IMHO.
  6. Totally agree. Perhaps because I really like city building. Nevertheless it's a pity many great models aren't used currently...
  7. Oh I remember well... Was a tough mission I think it makes sense to distinguish between artifacts (wheeled relics) and normal relics and provide both...
  8. gathering

    Hi @Orpheus, I have found the reason for that issue. In fact, it is different than assumed. I will fix it in the upcoming version 0.3, expect it to be ready no later than the beginning of January.
  9. gathering

    I just rebased the mod to Alpha 21, apart from the maps, which will require the most work to adapt. I am pretty sure that this mod is not suited to be included in a .diff because of two reasons. First, you need art because it is crucial to add visual feedback to the mines in order to avoid confusions. I also think there is a higher chance for the mod to be committed if it already provides the necessary art, at least as a temporary solution, until a proper artist can make improvements. However, I think that only little improvements are needed. Secondly, even without including art, the number of files and the total memory needed is very high. Just for your information: without art, without maps: 236 files, 0.4 MB with textures, without maps: 395 files, 18.4 MB without art, with maps: at least 428 files, at least 63.1 MB with textures, with maps: at least 587 files, at least 81.1 MB This would require at least 52 new templates and with art we would further need 18 MB. But I'm considering to implement this feature in the next version. I assume mining gold itself is not faster than mining iron; however, in the same amount of mining time you should get a greater value from gold than from iron. Actually iron is far more abundant than gold, so it seems strange to me to give gold a higher amount of metal. Ok that is convincing But what if we protected the mines with said mercenaries / barbarians / gaia gold miners? Thx for your interest
  10. Why not allow a choice between square and circular maps?
  11. I mean that each relic has a different effect/bonus which makes them more interesting. The effects can be very different and one civilization or strategy will benefit from a relic with a special bonus more than another. A relic may even be useless in rare cases. We don't have morale implemented. But a gather speed buff could be an example of an unique relic effect. How would citizens visit exhibitions in an RTS?
  12. gathering

    Primarily I tried to include as many visual differences between mines as possible. Including different gather speeds. But you are right, probably it isn't realistic, so I may consider to remove that feature. Finally someone seems to be interested in my mod Thanks, @Eraser I won't have time till after Christmas to update the code. But if you keep interest, I will try to provide you with an Alpha 21 / SVN compatible version. There have been a lot of changes in the relevant files, so this probably will require a good amount of time. However, not using above-mentioned feature of different gather animation speeds would greatly reduce the amount of work... The zipped mod folder currently needs 20 MB. Not sure if you consider that small enough. Without art the size may be <1 MB.
  13. I would prefer AOM style relics with unique buffs, e.g. +10% archer attack, +10% gather rate, spawning (and respawning after death) a special unit (e.g. a hero or a few champions), a resource trickle, etc. Or player could choose the relic type in game setup: no effect, metal trickle (AOK) or unique effects (AOM)
  14. Must have been inspired from my elephant mod. Thanks for implementing 50 sec burning time seems a bit long though for a pig, don't you think? I'd propose 30 sec, so you have to set them to flames directly before use... That reminds me, that I never really finished the mod