Community Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


sphyrth last won the day on March 18

sphyrth had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

269 Excellent

About sphyrth

  • Rank
  • Birthday 01/23/1989

Previous Fields

  • First Name
    Mon Janiel
  • Last Name

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Christianity, and FOSS

Recent Profile Visitors

535 profile views
  1. Champion Units are supposed to be your main military force, so it's understandable that Citizen Soldiers can't easily beat them. In Alpha 21, Champion Units have increased train time, so they're not as easy to spam as before and that's why Citizen Soldiers get most of the action. Unless you're fighting against Gauls, Athenians, or Spartans, I don't understand how you could let your enemy get to 20 Champions. What I'm getting at here is that you either have to practice out-pacing the enemy, or at least slow him down enough so you can produce your champions sooner than him. Maybe you produced too much economic units (Citizen Soldiers), and neglected to train the real military units (Champions and Heroes).
  2. I've always thought of DE as "0 A.D. on Steroids" with features waiting to be implemented on Vanilla. It's only now that I realized it's becoming its own game. I love that Cav Limit part. It's my favorite part. I'm willing to argue for the barracks, arch range, and stables. How about making the Special Buildings an Upgrade-able Entity from those Normal Buildings... just like the Sentry Towers? The only difference is that they can't be built. Only upgraded. It kinda looks cool having a Normal Archery Range get upgraded to a Champion Archery Range.
  3. Well, that happens to be my main argument: Historical Accuracy. My strongest example would be Marius' Mules. Soldiers who can build their forts and forage for food, but still capable of fighting... even if they can't realistically do both at the same time. My perspective about them changed when I looked at them from the angle of Villagers, and not Soldiers.
  4. I don't know why the previous video got deleted, but at least he reposted it
  5. I was thinking more the lines of "Citizen Soldiers should only exist in the Civic Center and nothing more". They can serve both as your melee and ranged hunters/miners/lumberjacks at the start of the game. Women will retain their foraging specialty. The rest should be regular soldiers... and then transition into champions and heroes. As long as they can keep their cultural distinctiveness at the start of the game (aesthetics), then they've done their part. Citizen Soldiers can be kept as a unique feature, but not as the central feature. Looking back at it, I never had a problem with Soldiers gathering. But now it seems silly to me when I look at it from a Villager perspective: Civic Center- Oh look, gatherers! Barracks - Oh look, more gatherers! Embassies - Oh look, I can hire gatherers! Battles - Oh look, I'm sending my gatherers to war! I have never treated the feature that I love in such a mocking way. It amuses me because I still love it nonetheless.
  6. More parts please!
  7. Disclaimer: This was done on one night, based heavily on one person’s comment, from one small voice (me) who is a peasant exercising his right on free speech. Quote in the "Resource System & Map control Elements" Following on @Wesley's comment, I went and tried to trace back the original intention of the Citizen Soldier up to the state they are currently in (not with research, but with assumptions, so go ahead and fault me for that). Now if 0 A.D.’s thesis in the Starting Game is “Make each Faction immediately recognizable”, then I believe they are successful in that. If I chose “Random” before we start, then I can immediately tell what Faction I’m controlling just by looking at the Civic Center and the units I have without looking at the Emblem at the center top part of the UI. This is where 0 A.D. improves over AoE2. Now, the Citizen Soldiers have inherited that aspect. Although they’re being mocked as “Soldiers who can gather”, they’re actually “Villagers who can fight” (Yes I’ll be relying on "'living' is not the same as 'not dying'" logic). If you’re complaining that you’d rather gather with these guys, then you shouldn't since they were intended to do that. It's players like me who are the ones using them in an un-orthodox manner (sending them to war). The reason why we have Champion Spams back then is that it is the original intention of the game: Gather with Citizen Soldiers, then send the Champions to war. But then, some things happened over the years: Horsemen have become a lot faster (they were nearly as fast as walking soldiers back then). Champion (Pure Military) Units have increased their train time. Citizen Soldiers received some rebalancing of stats. What all this all means is that the Citizen Soldiers have taken center stage both in the Economy and Military side of things. And, you know what? This further led me to recognize what @DarcReaver has been actively harping over the forums recently: Citizen Soldiers broke the game. 1. You can’t Distinguish between Economic and Military Units New players shouldn’t be going “Oh, my soldiers can gather and build. That’s cool!”. They should’ve been going “Oh, my villagers can defend themselves. That’s cool!” They don’t see Citizen Soldiers as Economic Units with Fighting as an add-on, they identify them as Military Units with Gather/Build as the add-on. The reason why we see @drsingh complaining about the Civic Center being able to train Military Units is that he doesn’t see the Citizen Soldiers as Economic Units. And judging from the game’s current state his complaint has become valid. 2. Lack of Military Unit Diversity And here's another problem, guys. If you’re wondering why we don’t have enough diversity in Champions or any Pure Military Units for that matter, then the reason is that most of the units went into the Citizen Soldier category. This must be the reason why I feel that Phase 2 is the emptiest phase in the game. You’re not presented with more military, you're presented with more gatherers. Here’s another thing. The elephant is a Soldier-type unit for whatever reason. But looking at a certain unit progression. I believe the original intention was this: Phase 1 – Citizen Soldiers + Women Phase 2 – Soldiers Phase 3 – Champions + Heroes That’s one way I can make sense for why there is a soldier-type unit. Now with all that in mind, I think we should not remove the gathering ability of the Citizen Soldiers since that was the original intention. Rather, something must be done with the military strength they obtained over the years. I think they should be nerfed. Rush Cavs (as much as I personally like to have that strategy available) should not be possible. Cavs should either lose their gathering capabilities, or they are not available in the Civic Center. A little harassment here and there can still be a staple in the early game, but rushes might not be good for a game that has city-building also in mind. Make Town Phase more relevant by putting the Town Phase Units from Citizen Soldiers to Soldier category. Yes, I know this post has come to a set of suggestions, but I believe this was the original gameflow of 0 A.D. Only that much of the playerbase has dictated to where it is now. Now, go. Tear down my arguments. I was just here to ramble.
  8. I mean, even if you remove those Rush Cavs. Since we're still decreasing the number of potential gatherers, doesn't that mean raiding is still easier? Edit: Question nullified by Thread Starter. No problem with that.
  9. For the sake of argument, doesn't this make Raiding easier since you only have to take down a few gatherers to disrupt the enemy's economy?
  10. The Iberian Video was from the "Testing Propositions" Thread. @Feldfeld and @soloooy0 posted their replays trying to prove that Booming Only is not the only viable strategy. I forgot which one of them I commentated on, but here's the list. And here is feldfeld's replay pack.
  11. Could "Almost everything has a Wood cost" be another factor? @wowgetoffyourcellphone said that it's one of the reasons he made DE (too lazy to find the source, it's in the "0 A.D. in Youtube Thread".
  12. The concept is indeed simple. "Keep your farms attended or else." Well, simple until a Raiding Party comes in. "Haha! Watch your farms rot while you stay in your buildings cowering in fear." I kinda like the system.
  13. Well, there you go. Maps affecting gameplay... some favoring corrals, and others favoring farms.
  14. Okay, let's talk about @wowgetoffyourcellphone I like this idea because of a certain implication. If you're a player like me, I favor map exploration. Asides from finding your enemy's farm and lumbercamps, and map treasures (which I turn off by default) I don't find map exploration very rewarding. From watching Aoe2 commentators, scouting the map for your first sheep/boars is very vital and encourages players to scout (both for animals and relics). For now, we have fruit trees and fruit bushes for that... but all of it is practically given by default in every starting match... your only real strategy is the build order (gather first or build first). I believe wow's suggestion gives such a rewarding feeling of possibly having an advantage against your enemy, and exploring the map.
  15. I think he's become a JeanClaude fan. Now for my own. I really hope I can have my own room and not have my dogs ruin the recording.