Leaderboard

It's not about having only two types of Embassies. I have no problem with that. But why can't I build two or more Italian Embassies for example? My suggestion is that the Mercenary Units can be unlocked in the Barracks by building these Embassies if I'm not able to multiply them.

Listen to Lordgood. Integrate now, if that is the decision. Also, cult statues can be eye candy objects for your mod if you want, but he's right, that they actually use a new 5th resource. So, if you want these civs to be as Vanilla-ish as possible, then true cult statue is out.

I have never liked the limit in the first place, and if it wasn't for me making a case for making it a limit of two, due to a limit of one clearly favoring production speed over cost for the old mercenary techs, otherwise it would still probably be one.

Cult statues require a new resource. As far as Terra Magna is concerned, it only hosts vanilla compatible mods, without changing core mechanics, incompatible with DE for sure with its glory resource, different templates, and expanded tech tree. Merging early with Terra Magna will prevent sloppy integration and ease updating between vanilla alpha versions, furthermore without the Terra Magna 'expansion' individual mods will get less traffic, and many people uninterested with the Kingdom of Kush will not be exposed through a shared interest with a Chinese or Mesoamerican mod. From a position as a creator of what are basically 4 mod civs, and as a vanilla artist, i will say unnecessary division absolutely will slow things down.

Is funny because other mercenary civs can Build unlimited building where train mercenary but Carthage can't . Carthage is supposed mercenary civ. But isn't the better in that.

This game is really cool, after recently beating both campaigns on hard I feel that I've finally mastered it. Back in the 1990s I was a child so I couldn't follow basic orders in this game. BattleZone is known as an RTS-FPS hybrid, in the game you can build a communication tower and then access a satellite, which allows you to command your units in RTS style. Usually you fly around shooting things with creative weapons! I personally liked BattleZone 2 a lot more but I haven't played it since 2002-2003. Watch some BZ2 below https://youtu.be/D5EglQGdXNc?t=21s It's a funny game because you can never play it like an actual RTS - enemy ships race into your base and the player must do much of the fighting himself, sometimes your ship is destroyed and you bail out. When on foot you have a jetpack (only in BZ2) so there is a survival element to BattleZone. It's good to retreat sometimes - getting stuck in enemy territory is high risk! BattleZone 2 impresses me the most because of the lighting effects and the different planets: Mire (a swamp planet with hostile raptor-like creatures), Bane (an ice planet with large animals that can attack vehicles, also there is ice that your tracked vehicles can fall through), then there's Rend (a planet full of volcanoes and lava, with minimal vegetation) and there is also The Dark Planet which has flashing blue crystals and an apparently synthetic surface, and finally there is a planet called Core which is an artificial planet that is home to the Scions (a race of people with spiritual/socialist views who are derived from humans). The characters and alien worlds were better in BZ2, BZ1 features only planets in our galaxy. You'll see in the video that while on foot, the player can snipe enemy pilots from their hovertanks, but you cannot snipe tracked vehicles. The rules on sniping turrets vary based on difficulty, and in BZ1 I think you can only snipe a turret when it's undeployed. Cool stuff! I wish they'd remake BattleZone 2 but that's a pipe dream. Rebellion Studios said they wouldn't do it.

If they had area of effect ranged healing, that would be pretty neat, although priests acting as healers is a tad odd to begin with. I dont even think the engine can support that

I find that difficult on the auto-healing side. Which units should they auto-heal? They don't automatically choose the one in the middle. But your idea seems better applied to Hero Healers... just to make them more unique or something. Well, since we're talking about it: it's a pet peeve seeing units that "pray to treat wounds". It even got me asking, "How DID people treat wounds back then?". But I just brushed it off since classical RTS just uses priests instead of real medics or something. But, yeah. Make (non-Wololo) priests more useful in-game.

1° Interesting proposition but have to be balanced wisely, with a group of priests maybe you can make a group of champions invicible for seconds. But at a certain point it can be useful even without being broken. Also, with this fast heal, you can consider that some can, in let's say 300 pop game, mass healers enough to constantly area heal army, because some priests would still heal while the cooldown has passed for others, so infinite heal. also, keep in mind that in fight infantry champions takes not that much place to fight so easy to heal. Healing wisely would maybe counter massed ranged units. 2°I think medical center as you described it would be not that much used, pretty slow healing rate, if you don't have 5 healers in you better go back to nearest temple but i might be wrong. Priests definitely need a change.

I think the main cause for that is, that (at the moment) you cannot set such build restriction. The only possible Build restriction is: The player should not be allowed to build more than x of entity with type "foo".

I expose this idea plenty here.

@balduin Depending on many factors, the development could take anywhere from several months, to several years. Our job is to try and get it done in a good time, without necessarily rushing it. That having said, most of the relevant and reliable visual references for the Kushites are already posted in the forum. With further follow up questions and research, we could definitely flesh out some more of the details, but a lot has already been linked. If LordGood continues to work even at half the speed he is know, we'll be sure to see major progress in the next months. Also, don't forget that most of the structures follow a certain template, within which the specific features of a civ are demonstrated. There are certain paramaters, to keep buildings recognizable, and in line with analogue buildings of other civs. It compromises historical accuracy to some extent, but it keeps the game playable. So some interpretation is unavoidable (even preferable), as long as it is within reasonable limits. There are also very few pop-culture references for these people, which I believe is actually a good thing, in terms of accurately depicting them. We won't fall for the trap of stereotyping them too much, because there aren't many stereotypes about the Kushites (most people only know them from written references). For example, the battering ram will be an interpretation of scant references. And many of the units are going to have to be historically reconstructed from what we know, although Total War modders have already done a great job at that (which means we don't need to stress too much about how units looked). I'll try to contact the department of history in the University of Khartoum, or some Nubian and Cushitic language experts to determine some realistic names for buildings and units. Furthermore, I have no objection to the Kushites being rolled into Terra Magna and Delenda Est. Seems like a logical choice… Also, I like cult statues, and something like the Iberian cult statue feature would fit well. Statues were a symbol of physical and spiritual power and wealth to the Kushites, and they would have fought fiercely to protect them. @balduin the chest of the lion on the left and middle, is decorated with stylised manes (or jewelry?) with a cartouche at the height of it's throat, inscribed with hieroglyphs probably mentioning who commissioned them, or which god they're dedicated to (or both).

I can compile 0AD on a crappy old Duocore under Linux, so your new laptop is definitely fast enough to do some programming

I like this. It's similar to how I see the idea of mini-civs. I think with mini-civs, the mercenary camp would be replaced by a small village, with a (simple) civic-center surrounded by some houses and a few gatherers/soldiers. The civ is static (doesn't expand). After capturing the civic-center, you can train mercenary units from it. Each mini-civ would represent a different culture, preferably those cultures surrounding the existing civs in order to create a more cohesive whole in terms of the interconnectedness of the civs already in the game. I do think the ability to destroy them would add an even more interesting dynamic to them. They should initially defend themselves with a small force, until you capture their civic center. If you destroy it, you can't use them anymore. This is interesting because then you could attempt to destroy an enemy's mini-civ, and cut them off from further mercenary supplies, without necessarily having to consolidate your hold over a territory far away from your own. I think it might apply well to DE as well?

Well if you guys are planning to have Greek and Persian Embassies (which limits Carthage to build 4 Embassy types), then that's fine. But that wasn't exactly my point. Given the situation now, why can't I build 3 Italian Embassies, and 2 Iberian Embassies? I mean, I still have 2 Embassy Types, right? I just realized that my post is whiny, so I apologize for that.

Well, IRC, that was a decision made by Mythos, suggested somehow by me. My first proposal was that Carthaginians should choose between 2 of the 3 embassies, disallowing 1 to build. I think that currently you can't choose between 3 techs (only pairs works), but my intention wasn't limiting to 2 the numbers if embassies. As you said, a merc civ that can build only 2 embassies doesn't have sense

I bought a laptop for my course, it's an ACER with a solid-state HD and an AMD A4 processor. I was going to get the A10 but there aren't many being produced so I grabbed this one (the shop offered Intel i5 but it was more expensive if I wanted a solid-state HD with the i5). The shop I went to has decades of experience and the old geezer at the shop told me that the best ACER they sell is one called Travel Mate - that one is designed to be thrown into your backseat when you're in a hurry, it's an extra $300 in my currency so I went for the cheaper one. There are many budget laptops that are rubbish! Often the only thing protecting the components is a layer of plastic (when I hold my mum's HP I can feel the plastic flex in my and). More expensive laptops have a sheet of metal, and also metal hinges so the screen doesn't break ... I look after my stuff though so I'm indifferent. I think of electronics as being e-waste so I don't mind getting stuff that's slightly cheap and nasty. The Alcatel smartphone that I bought from Vodafone would have been the best thing 3 years ago, Apple would have sold it for over $1,000 NZD not too long ago, I waited and got similar specs for a fraction of the price. 2GB of RAM on a Android phone means you're using 85% of it at any given time, so it isn't great but it works for now and I'm actually trying to save money this year. When I was working 6 days a week I felt justified having a sports car, a bottle of Vodka whenever I felt withdrawal symptoms, and a few packs of cigars when I got stressed not any more though! What do you guys think of AMD? Someone on my course was saying on our Slack.com channel that he doesn't like AMD, I didn't ask why I guess it's mostly opinion. AMD might not have the best electricity efficiency but they sell cheaper stuff, Intel seems to charge too much in my opinion. I have an AMD A-10 on my desktop so I thought why not have an A-4 on my laptop. AMD isn't known for mobile CPU but hey if I keep buying their stuff maybe it'll become more common.

@balduin You're not very optimistic! I'm pretty sure Lordgood will have finished all structures within two or three months. As for the units, there's already the ptolemaic nubian archer, and considering all the resources at the team's disposal, I don't think it's impossible to have a first playable version within six months (But maybe I'm too optimistic...)

Two to three years is a little long for a first playable version. I think it is doable to have on around alpha 23 or at least with alpha 24 (though, of course, it depends a bit on what your understanding of a 'first playable version' is) I agree with the rest of your comment though

Glory and Cult Statues How Siege Weapons are built is heavily modified for all civs Mercenaries and Mercenary Camps Technology trees completely changed, expanded, and complexity added Too many other thing to list here

This is actually historically incorrect for the period. In the early history of Buddhism, he was never shown in physical form. Definitely not in that particular style. That comes much later. He's shown through symbols, Bodhi tree, empty throne, empty horse, empty chariot, stupa, etc. etc etc etc If you need a statue, Buddha, in the symbol of a Chakra Or Triratana

Thanks for introducing yourself Please let us know if you suceed building 0 A.D. or if you need more help EDIT: If you find any information missing/missleading or errors in our wiki please let us know

Stan is correct, I just took the CC0 statue high-poly mesh and made a lowpoly version. Then baked maps and made the textures. Good results with minimal effort IMO.

Guys, I have successfully modded siege weapons to be able to be build in the field by soldier! Behavior isn't 100% satisfactory, but is 95% of the way to what I think want to be. The only thing is that the Onagers swivel (this is right word?) too fast. I think they should swivel slower to face their target. Other than that, my new Field Artillery tech work wonderful! Right now, the tech, Field Artillery, is only enabled for the Principate Romans. I will enable them for other catapult civs eventually. Research Ballistics at Fortress. This both unlock ranged siege weapons and unlock Field Artillery tech at Fortress. Research Field Artillery to allow Principate Roman infantry soldiers to build stationary Onagers in Neutral, and Enemy territory. So very good to siege cities! I think I will make stationary Onager catapult the field artillery for the Principate Romans, and then allow Heavy Ballista, a packable, moving siege weapon, for building at Fortress. Right now the field Onager cost more and take longer to build than Onager at Fortress. They also still cost housing. Another change I make is to have the Flaming Munitions tech swap actor of the Onager to make the stone go to flaming only after researching the tech. This reminds me of Age of Mythology how they did this and make a visual understanding of the effects. Guys this make me happy that these thing is achievable with the current engine.

The ones in the picture are for the Principate Romans (AD era) in the DE mod. The Romans in the vanilla game are Republican Romans from BC era.

Has it ever seemed strange to you that you bought a villager, well - a new dawn has come. Birthrates are the answer, 2 villagers (guy and gal) will under certain conditions* create a new villager every 15 seconds. *1. You set your maximum # of villagers (type in box at the capitol) to a number that you think suitable at the moment ( you can always change it) as villagers mulitply, naturally the brithrate does so as well. 2.Increase in birthrate is done by several methods, but only one condition. is that there is a guy and a gal. 3. If your villagers are in the area effect of a temple birthrates increase 30%- 15 seconds is as high as it gets, 60(and then none) is the worst. 4. At the market there would be a special reasource - wine(for civilized civs) beer for barbarians. Increase in birthrate 30% - cost of one 30 second round is a reasonable price of gold. 5.Victory - death of 20 enemy units increases birthrates by 40%. I know that this is sort-of edging on city building, but it would be more interesting and factual than just buying a person. Questions? Bugs?

Well... I guess that turns a page on the history of my genius... *deep breath in* Eahha *deep breath out* AHhha___ I THINK I'll make a post at the battle forums - GARRRAG

I personally don't like the idea. It'll be too distracting, people in the middle of battles will have to go back to their town to task their new villager populus. But heres an idea that makes this concept better: How about after you create a certain building (nursery maybe? Well you think of a better name then ), it'll spawn villagers based on the amount of male/female villagers you have. To add depth the building has small children or teenagers animated around it. The building would have similar functions as the capital, you can task the villagers that spawn from there to a resource and like someone else said, you can set a max of spawned villagers This will decrease micro-ing and will give players the decision if they want villagers to spawn or not, because if they're in a tight spot in battle they wouldn't like it if extra villagers are taking up their population limit. Also by tasking the units they won't have to worry about having to go back and forth to asign the new villagers a task to do. Furthermore I think there should be a set limit to how many villagers you can spawn. This could play well historically with laws of overpopulation that some empires had (or should've had), so lets say you can spawn a maximum of ## villagers based on the amount of houses or buildings or villagers (or some other variable) that you have

Ad – I know that you can’t worry about cutting individual cornstalks but equipping soldiers is a good idea (just kidding). Also, I’m not a RTS fantasy type of guy I’m talking more about 0 A.D. - of course you can use these ideas on anything. Have games reached the limit of ingenuity, has the pinnacle been reached? Perhaps I am overly concerned about RTS repetitive syndrome, but where will a NEW game begin? Freeware is an excellent place to start: you have plenty of time, money is not an issue, and the big businesses have a hard time being revolutionary because it is so hard to test new things in our competitive world. Hey, I know that you can’t use every new idea and suggestion, but where will tradition end and revolution rise? Look at Rick Goodman – he had a revolutionary idea with AoE I see what happened? You (WFG) have an excellent opportunity to explore new ideas that the market can’t produce. WFG has so much potential if only you would use it. One day if any of us that are involved with WFG become a computer game designer this game will invariably help us – you would know that this idea is going to be a smash hit, or a solid flop. If you have put so much work into your game, can’t you put in the extra mile just to see if it’s a success – that’s what’ll make your game that much better than everyone else’s – the guts to take the risk. Again see what happened with Rick? See what happened with Myst? Look at the big picture – Leave RTS for the moment, and go to RT (Real Time) and maybe this is the threshold of a wonderful opportunity to explore, if failure – then who cares it was fun to make, and maybe you enjoy playing it right, and you know that it doesn’t work so if you become a designer that’s one less thing to worry about. Can Wildfire Games begin the revolution that forever changes gaming?

Hey guys something to clear up - Villagers do not grow. The cost of the villager is not decreasing food, thats the parents job, you make the parents happy, and the villager is born insantaniously, not growing from child to teen to adult - I agree that is too complex just say thats part of the birthrate - 15 seconds for and adult villager. Av_nefardec, I do fully understand the philosophy started in AoEI that a food and time represent a villager growing to adult and all, but something new needs to happen, I'm sick of *Drony voice* Historically based Real-time strategy game spanning the ages - THEY ALL SAY THAT. Sure they all have different aspects of gameplay, but there needs to be a revolutionary game - like AoEI in its time. Why not do it in 0 A.D. - its the PERFECT testing grounds for the next generation of Real Time Strategy.