Jump to content


Community Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

17 Good

1 Follower

About Palaiologos

  • Rank

Previous Fields

  • First Name

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    New Jersey, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @FeXoR @Imarok @Angen @Nescio @wowgetoffyourcellphone @Lion.Kanzen @Trinketos mountain out of a molehill player bartered 500 Food for 409 Stone. player bartered 409 Stone for 500 Food. x for y y for x no difference works perfectly fine watch replay. at one point he is under the impression that his opponent is 'getting rid of stone' for food when it is in fact the exact opposite that is occurring. It is his own confusion. ********** problem isn't with ambiguity nor the flexibility of english language nor substituting barter for exchange or gained, received, anything else ********** * TRANSCRIPT * BoredRusher bartered 409 Stone for 500 Food. BoredRusher bartered 340 Stone for 500 Food. says - "boredrusher getting some stone" BoredRusher bartered 287 Stone for 500 Food. BoredRusher bartered 330 Stone for 500 Wood. says - "i think that's how that works" says - "look, for some reason i feel like that should be the other way around" says - "if they're getting rid of food and getting stone it should be bartered food for stone, but it does it the other way around i think, im really not sure" says - "thats weird, like why would you be "buying" ( he pauses talking and the moment of confusion has set in for whatever reasons...) "getting rid of" your stone to get food, there is no reason he would be doing that" Notice BoredRusher never "gets rid of" stone in those 4 exchanges? same... goes from saying "gets some" (stone) to later saying "gets rid of" (stone) ^^ this is the moment where he gets wrong what ACTUALLY occurred by BoredRushers 4 "bartering" choices. says - "no, there is no way" says - "he got stone so that he could get more barracks (stone for barracks as maury???) and such and another civic center" says - "thats weird, thats weird... am i the only person that thinks thats weird?" says - "yea that should be the other way around, he bartered the food for the stone, no he "got" the stone, by bartering away the food" says - "or... or... (again questions himself as to what ACTUALLY occured) did BuredRusher actually give away stone to get food?" Your honor, I rest my case. @psypherium, no hard feelings <3 ... am a condescending @#&#036;% sometimes
  2. Called me Palaionub during the match... Clearly has a good sense of humor... He didn't rage quit when being rushed and even helped his team by sending resources and building ally second cc/fighting to hold critical position, etc. Remember that at one point he had a rank 700-800 which shows he has evolved and improved.. Exactly.
  3. My specs XFX Radeon RX 580 8GB GTS Black Edition No issues after a year or so and easy on the wallet... Hope it helps.
  4. Nice map in theory. Some minor issues where you have resources that are inaccessible or there are 10 units stuck trying to reach a single tree. commands.txt metadata.json
  5. No, I can recall it happening in single player mode as well as in-game during online multi. Then this, I suppose would confirm the rough/randomly selected ballpark figure of "50/50" working/not working. Most likely, but idk. Shouldn't the players know of this? If, in fact true that you need the required resource amount to right-click for view more info?
  6. Have always had this same issue, right clicking for more info on buildings/units/upgrades etc. only appears to work some of time, would say that there is roughly a 50/50 chance that the information is not displayed regardless of what civilization or info I am attempting to view.
  7. @nani Where would this be for linux users? 0ad/binaries/data/public/maps/random ?
  8. Right. Very cool Yea, mostly meant just as a passability issue, sometimes (tropic/desert biome f.e.) you have it where units can't really pass in-between/through because the trees are bunched up too tightly is all. Not necessary, the player just won't utilize fishing as their primary source for food. How would you sabotage your opponents food supply? I guess it won't be necessary either if it's more of a race to the top...
  9. Nice work @nani Tower of Babel -esque. Fascinating manifestation you have come up with. Can't wait to try this out. Shouldn't the water be accessible on both sides(not completely though)? Atleast 5/10% on the cliffed side of the water, a small sliver of land to have a buildable dock maybe? I guess it would defeat the purpose of what your intending too and wouldn't make much sense... If you tower the cliff side of the water, they take out the fishing boats or even potentially the treelines? So, only catapult-ships will take out the towers? Lastly, will certain players be greatly disadvantaged depending upon whether they will have to clear the forest before even being able to make the turn around the Hill?
  10. Am unfamiliar with this game :/ Trying to envision how you mean. So its not exactly a bribe, you wouldn't end up bribing a desired unit(s) near the hero that would turn against him/her? I kinda see what your saying. Just a single trainable unit?
  11. Ok, I have a vague idea, cool. Sigh. I see. Alright, thank you.
  12. Some sort of enhancement? I recently upgraded my monitor to an ASUS MG248Q, could this have been the culprit when seeing those images?
  13. Bribes. I really like this feature. Anyhow, making bribable units other than traders or maybe the trader that was selected for the bribe gives over the resources (without the other players knowledge) it is carrying till the end of game/killed. Another player had suggested mercenaries since they hold no allegiance. I think it would be neat if players had the ability to bribe heros for xyz amount(high treason).
  • Create New...