Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 2019-01-02 in Posts

  1. As a similar point, I read that women were occasionally druids as well. While I can't remember the book's title, it seemed academically legitimate enough to cite. For those who are more familiar with druidism, I would appreciate your thoughts.
    3 points
  2. Why not. This illustration is based on the weapons from a tomb with both etruscan and celtic items. The author choose to use the Mars of Todi since it represents an etruscan cuirass. These cuirasses are probably what could have motivated the Celts to use them. The warrior is therefore a cisalpine warrior. Yes you can. https://medias.monuments-nationaux.fr/var/cmn_inter/storage/images/mediatheque/mediatheque-commune/images/087glanum/602353-1-fre-FR/087GLANUM.jpg Why a bronze cuirass? It is kinda uncommon in the Italic peninsula after the fifth century. I don't think any Celts of the La Tène period could have use it Europe. Maybe some Galatian bodyguards. But thats all.
    3 points
  3. " The Kin Slayer " "You are my kin and you are close to my heart but it is my birthright and I am claiming what is mine." "Lay down your sword and swear your oath, refuse and I will not hesitate to desecrate the laws of the gods and spill the blood of my kinsman."
    3 points
  4. Not entirely correct. Yes, pitched battles were rare; if you had written "sieges were twenty times as common as pitched battles" I wouldn't have objected. However, your hyperbole is misleading: warfare actually consisted mostly of skirmishes, raids, plundering the countryside, that kind of things.
    2 points
  5. Hi everyone, i give you some update on the job done so far: I created successfully money resources and i created a mechanism to increment this value proportionally to the GDP of the civ, the GDP is calculated as a sum of each resource amount times the resource price, i calculated the price of each resource using the Actual Population as a criteria, the concept behind is the market law of demand and offer, so if the metal (for example) collected exceed by far the actual population its price go down, if instead the metal is minor , its price go higher these are the Spec for who is interested: I don t post how create money resource cause there are already a tutorial for it. i achieved the mechanism of economic gain doing this: Session.js --> add this code to onTick() .... var framCounter = 0 function onTick() { framCounter += 1; if (framCounter % 32 == 0) { // We start the money Supply calling a method of GuiInterface Engine.GuiInterfaceCall("GetStartedMoneySupply"); } ....} GuiInterface.js --> add this method GuiInterface.prototype.GetStartedMoneySupply = function() { //let cmpMoneySupplyer = Engine.QueryInterface(SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_MoneySupply); //cmpMoneySupplyer.AddResources(); let numPlayers = Engine.QueryInterface( SYSTEM_ENTITY, IID_PlayerManager ).GetNumPlayers(); for (let i = 0; i < numPlayers; ++i) { let cmpPlayer = QueryPlayerIDInterface(i); let totres = cmpPlayer.GetResourceCounts(); let totMetal = totres["metal"]; totMetal == 0 ? (totMetal = 0.01) : totMetal; let totStone = totres["stone"]; totStone == 0 ? (totStone = 0.01) : totStone; let totWood = totres["wood"]; totWood == 0 ? (totWood = 0.01) : totWood; let totFood = totres["food"]; totFood == 0 ? (totFood = 0.01) : totFood; // --> IMPLEMENTATION // Next Step is add also all Services and products produced // Calculte Resources Prices divinding population for tot resources let totPop = cmpPlayer.GetPopulationCount(); let metalPrice = totPop / totMetal; let stonePrice = totPop / totStone; let woodPrice = totPop / totWood; let foodPrice = totPop / totFood; // --> IMPLEMENTATION // Next Step is to trade every resources with money and calculate the offer and the request to more accuratly calculate resources prices // Calculate GDP let gdp = totMetal * metalPrice + totStone * stonePrice + totWood * woodPrice + totFood * foodPrice; // Adding Money to all players if (cmpPlayer) cmpPlayer.AddMoneyResource(0.01 * gdp); } }; and finally in Player.js adding this method Player.prototype.AddMoneyResource = function(amount) { this.resourceCount["money"] += +amount; }; Done, is simple but work quite well, but now i am planning to create something more advanced, the plan is to create a UnitFinance Component, and record for each entity the money earned and spent , if this is achieved i can divide the entity is simple worker, owner of shop, trader and Goverment, each with different degree of collect, spend and earn money, from that i can also calculate the GDP of the civ in a more specific way and associate the money supply i did before as a percent of GDP or as a Tax collection, with money the Player could buy weapons, Units, Building Infrustracture etc... quite . a lot i know but i will give a try, very appreciated people want to give a help in this or want to implement the idea. Ciaooo
    2 points
  6. I personally prefer something more remote from Asterix and XIXth century romanticism representations. If we have the possibility to give a different vision of these cultures, it is something good to do.
    2 points
  7. The mistletoe headdres? i'll be doing it soon .
    2 points
  8. Just a reminder that very saturated coloured dyes and paints did not exist until the 18 century. Enjoy the Choice
    2 points
  9. As one recommendation, add a depiction for temples of Serapis. Serapis was an important symbol of Ptolemies themselves. There are a few visual references to how they looked such this coin for an Alexandrian part. While this doesn't need to be a standard replacement, I think that having it as a variant or even just and map editor prop would be good. .
    2 points
  10. I'm not really a fan of this outfit. Genava's suggestion might make it look better though. Maybe this variant of the druid could have pants instead of a dress, like the reference above ?
    2 points
  11. @Genava55 Would this work for Celtic druids?
    2 points
  12. The quote from Plutarch: Maybe we can add some golden and silver object on the cuirass? https://ansionnachfionn.com/2017/09/20/did-leather-armour-really-exist-not-for-the-celts-romans-and-vikings/ And despite the frequent online references to the hide “battle-harness” of the legendary Irish hero, Cú Chulainn, the speculations and the early 20th century translations they are based upon are probably wrong. Almost certainly what is being referred to is layers of textiles and flexible soft leather braced with a wide cowhide belt. (Linen? Felt? Linothorax?) “Then the champion and warrior, the marshalled fence of battle of all the men of earth who was Cú Chulainn, put on his battle-array of fighting and contest and strife. Of that battle-array which he put on were the twenty-seven shirts, waxed, board-like, compact, which used to be bound with strings and ropes and thongs next to his fair body that his mind and understanding might not be deranged whenever his rage should come upon him. Outside these he put on his hero’s battle-girdle of hard leather, tough and tanned, made from the choicest part of seven yearling ox-hides which covered him from the thin part of his side to the thick part of his armpit. He wore it to repel spears and points and darts and lances and arrows, for they used to glance from it as if they had struck on stone or rock or horn. Then he put on his apron of filmy silk with its border of variegated white gold against the soft lower part of his body. Outside his apron of filmy silk he put on his dark apron of pliable brown leather made from the choicest part of four yearling ox-hides with his battle-girdle of cows’ hides about it.”
    2 points
  13. To inspire you. A recent french book with nice illustrations.
    2 points
  14. I think there was a lot of discussion about this in the day. I like the Temple of Edfu as their wonder. That way you don't have players building a "lighthouse" in the middle of desert or something.
    2 points
  15. I would like the Gate of All Nations to finally be made the Persian wonder.
    2 points
  16. From personal experience with A23 and reading all the forum posts I can, I'd like to summarize my own suggestions/features that could be of interest for the next release. I'd try to be as synthetic as possible, but of course we can develop this ideas further if there is interest/discussion. Siege engines Battering rams. Actually I find even sword cavs to have problems while chasing a retreating rams, lets not even talk about walking soldiers Should have a lower base speed. Garrison units inside rams should increase the speed and even damage a bit Pykes and spear soldiers should be able to damage them, to simulate the fact a ram is driven by other soldiers which will take damage from the enemy (but I think this would need to differentiate between archers and pykes/spears damage) Bolts. By far the most efficient tool to kill enemies I have seen on A23 They need to be more vulnerable, specially when chased on retreat with again another base movement speed reduction It could be nice to "garrison" units inside which could increase rate of fire and it's defenses. If this can be packed with additional animations showing the soldiers of that units, could be awesome Catapults Packing and unpacking speed should be raised, this would emphasize on the decision making when using them. Actually players can pack and unpack them soon enough to deny their opponents the possibility to retaliate when attack goes wrong Should be easier to take down, with incremental resistance with garrisoned units Siege towers. Actually have little to no use Same as battering rams, should get lower base speed and increase it with garrisoned units but walking units should be still able to catch it They should be able to capture at least certain targets (castles, cc, military colonies and towers, to not make them OP) to better define their role into the battlefield while being able to keep attacking - maybe at a slower rate when capturing War elephants They could have some extra armors in general but most important they must deal some damage around them, if possible only while walking to better simulate their use Ranged infantry units You may already know my opinion from other posts, IMO it's not about "ranged/slingers win games" but about choice. Actually there's dominant choice when composing an army: few frontline units (if any) and about 10 times those units as ranged. From this dominant choice, Bretons arise as the first choice civ: "one-size-fits-all" slingers from the beginning, faster eco, the security of being hard to be rushed and a fair possibility to be the first one to attack the enemy. Archers New feature: suppression. I will explain this later Minimal range, same idea of towers. If a unit enters this minimal range, it cannot be shot and the archer need to fall back Javelins New feature: suppression. I will explain this later Slingers New feature: suppression. I will explain this later Same health than other units maybe but definitely much less armor Lower base damage, movement speed (they carry rocks), attack speed and remove blast damage but let them be improved by techs: Clay ammunition: extends range and attack speed Casted lead ammunition: improves damage Also note Carthagians merc slingers should have a bit better stats than others, as Balearic Slingers were widely known in the ancient era for their capability. I guess this should also includes Iberians slingers, but I am not sure if that's historically accurate. Features Melee infantry block probability. Positional damage is still on developement, wouldn't be easier to add a block probability to incoming attacks meanwhile? I am probably wrong, but a similar process used from the game when deciding if an arrow hits or not, could be used to determine if a shielded unit blocks incoming damage or not Suppresion. Archers and slingers should slow enemy units to better reflect their support role in the battlefield. Spears, but specially pykes, should also slow enemy cavs to increase their utility on the battlefield. Terrain as strategic factor River crossing All units should move much slower when walking on water Siege engines should not be able to cross rivers, but need to be transported instead Trees Slows cavs, as it's harder to maneuver Protect from ranged attacks (maybe block feature related?) Elevated places. I am not sure about this, but I am pretty sure the game already takes into account if a unit is on a higher place to extend their attack range. However, it should also be taken into account to extend their vision range A LOT more. This is specially true for towers and vision towers. I am sure I left something behind, but probably it's enough to discuss for now. I hope you all enjoy the post and join a productive discussion.
    1 point
  17. oh i didnt notice this thread, i have balancing some suggestions 1. OP CIV META my sugestion would be nerfing gauls, britons and ptolemies - that will let players for more competetive play (and more fair play), players in multiplayer wont be forced to play these 3 civilizations if they want to win. there are lot of civs that i like but the urge to pick OP civ is ultra big. above mentioned civilisations are too fast I played many competetive games MOBA included and it is unavoidable to not have stronger and weaker civs/characters/champions but the gap between these 3 and rest is so big that most players started 'maining' celtics and ptolemies, to the point where at least half of each game on multiplayer are celtics and ptolemies (sometimes all players) if these 3 civs were growing at same pace that other civilisations do, it would be great 2. RANGED UNIT META Althrough point 2. and 3. arent as troublesome as point 1, I noticed ranged units are much stronger overall than melee units. maybe with small dmg nerf people would start using melee units for something else than for human shields supposed to die instead of ranged units lol 3. SLINGER > ARCHER,JAVELIN one could think if archers have biggest range then they are strongest, or vice versa - javelins, because they have biggest dmg. thats not the case. slingers can kill javelins before they come close. Javelins have bigger dmg than slingers, but it doesnt do anything because slingers already have enough dmg to kill. why would you need more? ranged units are often hitting same target, so if u have 60 ranged units together, theres HUGE chance they will atk same targets, and only 5 attacks would be enough to kill, but since it was the closest target, theres often situation where 60 of ranged units hit exactly same person instead of splitting their arrows for targets, therefore a lot of arrows are wasted. thats case in fights javelin vs slinger (not with archers, they have low dmg), javelin just die before they come close, and when they are close they also atk slower so the 'bigger dps' isnt really bigger, its much smaller slingers somehow have perfect atk range and atk speed, so the supposedly bigger javelins damage isnt helping them at all, because they are slower and need to come closer, and they will die before that happens my few thoughts
    1 point
  18. Don't worry too much about the tone. Lion isn't a native english speaker, and most of the time what can be understood as a harsh tone is just plain mistranslation from spanish (And he improved a lot :))
    1 point
  19. The cucullus is an usual cloth, popular both among the Romans and the Gauls. The only unusual word related with the cucullus is bardocucullus, that could means something related to the bard (musician). http://www.arbre-celtique.com/encyclopedie/cucullus-cuculla-manteau-314.htm The three peoples with the cucullus are often three goddesses or nymphae. Xulsigiae. Related to the roman mythology as well (Matres and Matronae). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xulsigiae https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matres_and_Matronae The problem is common with these figures. There are males representations, but often distinguishing the gender is hard. Moreover, the influence of the Roman can cause the gender to switch sometimes for some cult. There is a long debate in this article here: http://archive.fo/xcqd With an headdress like the one I proposed, it should be okay no?
    1 point
  20. I personally never found the game to be unstable, but maybe I don't stress test it enough If the crash is not related to saved games it might be interesting to report it, yes. As for motivating developers to fix it you mind find it easier now that we can actually work on something else than the release. Maybe it's a trivial bug that can be fixed Unreported bugs can't be known
    1 point
  21. Very nice these new textures! only thing I would like to add is that they look a bit dark too me (but I might be wrong about that)
    1 point
  22. I have an idea. You know this headdress from Glauberg: It is actually an inspiration from sacred plant from the Celts. The mistletoe: Re-enactors have proposed this headdress for a chieftain: BUT, it could be a religious symbol used by the Druids as well, the mistletoe is known to be used by the Druids.
    1 point
  23. That was my initial concept but it would make it hard to distinguish the healer for elite units if I switch to pants. What are your thoughts on this?
    1 point
  24. If the others don't find it problematic to give a chainmail armor to a priest unit, why not. I have no problem with this, it could have been the case. Some druids took the military leadership during the Gallic Wars. However I find the texture of the cape/sagum a bit unesthetic at the bottom. Maybe a bit more on the side like this:
    1 point
  25. I like the cardiopylax, I have seen plenty of references that have that kind of armor.
    1 point
  26. For the back: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1080040398756590&amp;set=pb.100002519195744.-2207520000.1546426868.&amp;type=3&amp;theater Other useful symbols:
    1 point
  27. @Anaxandridas ho Skandiates Yes, I noticed that they glossed over the lacquer finishing, pun intended... But to say that they are useless and fake is a bit harsh, don't you think? They put an incredible amount of work into it, which I'm yet to see repeated, let alone improved by other teams of experts. I don't think they're too far off, perhaps not a mythical "100%", but nothing a little "varnish" can't fix... I mean, it's nothing like the Spanish Jesus fiasco: It's like making out Outlaw King to be Braveheart. They tried... The final result wasn't too shabby.
    1 point
  28. No problem with the tattoos. The bronze chain mail is a problem. I don't think there is any evidence in the world for an entire armor made of bronze rings. Technologically speaking, it is not practical. As far as I know there is only small quantity of bronze rings on some chain mail armor to decorate the thing during the Roman Empire. The length seems excessive as well. It looks like a medieval hauberk. The helmet seems fine. It is a coolus model, maybe the one from Canterbury. Is this a Briton unit? It looks like you took your inspiration from a Pict outfit but entirely in chain mail.
    1 point
  29. I need your opinion on these, @Genava55
    1 point
  30. Immortals will be have secondary attack.(bow)
    1 point
  31. 1 point
  32. 1 point
  33. There are evidences for this on the cauldron of Gundestrup and on several gallo-roman statues. The museum of Bibracte did a representation in this way for an "aide de camp": https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Bibracte_Dumnorix.jpg
    1 point
  34. Committed Reworked some of my previous textures from DE that was committed to the game New Celtic female textures New cape textures Review Basic Celtic unit textures
    1 point
  35. Here's the finished file Amanirenas portrait.rar
    1 point
  36. actually, slingers are perfectly mid-way between archers and skirmishers on : range, speed, and attack. That's theory. But in practice, while slingers can use their bigger range to escape quick enough inter-bumping skirmishers ; archers move just too slow to move away in time (at least on long distance) . Its seems that slingers occupy a really tiny piece of land and bump in each other very few. In my opinion, slingers should be the fastest unit moving but providing less damage than archers (which is reality quite obvious). So rather than making slingers simply a mix between archers and skirmishers ; rather make archers the best ranged ; the slingers the fastest and the skirmishers the most harmful. To summarize > Now its : (1 is the best , 2 middle, 3 the worst) skirm sling archer speed 1 2 3 range 3 2 1 attack 1 2 3 > it should be skirm sling archer speed 2 1 3 range 3 2 1 attack 1 3 2
    1 point
  37. The current problem for siege towers in my opinion is that they are easily killed by rams, catas or sword units. This is what makes them not so useful in the battle. I personally thing that, if the speed has to be decreased, the damage should be increased or noone will even train them. For example, 2 rams from another player could easily kill 7 siege towers in a game I did, that is quite exagerated. You mean that they are slowed because they have to defend with shields from the shots? Ships can't pass a ford. In a low height water map it would be impossible to kill the enemy then... Anyway, I like really a lot your opinions, so thanks for the comment
    1 point
  38. Hello, any news about update that would fix ''There is lag when many units are moving'', game is literally unplayable because of lag There is lag when many units are moving
    1 point
  39. I was just thinking about the issue of ranged units being OP (except infantry archers of course, lol) the other night. The problem, as in other RTS games, is that each ranged units is constantly hitting a target whereas melee units have to reach the target first. However, as noted, a mixed army with a strong majority of ranged units will typically defeat an all ranged army. The idea I had to make the game work more favorably for melee units was to decrease accuracy of ranged units based on obstructions. This would mean that other units or buildings in the line of fire (but which are not the target) would cause a big penalty to the firing unit's accuracy. This obstruction accuracy penalty would not happen or be less extreme based on the elevation the unit is firing from. The higher the elevation the lower the penalty. Of course, I'm not a programmer...I don't know how implementable this would be. If the above were implemented, I predict that: Majority Ranged Army defeats All ranged Army Majority Melee Army defeats Majority Ranged Army (unless the Majority Ranged Army has strategic positioning/maneuvers for direct lines of fire to the enemy) Majority Melee Army defeats All Melee Army (because the Majority Melee Army would do damage before the melee starts) All Ranged Army vs All Melee Army... If the All Ranged army gets a surround they eat the All Melee, but not as bad as they do currently. If shield directionality boosted defense vs ranged units and formations gave advantages specific to the formation, I would be happy with that solution. There's already a defense boost for any formation the Athenian hero is in.
    1 point
  40. Hi guys, "I figured out the problem", lol It's not ranged units that's the real problem. It's actually the melee units themselves that are the problem! They don't have a directional defense, nor can they make use of shield walls. Many ancient armies fought in formations, especially heavy melee infantry formations were usually the core units in pitched battles. Because they often carry shields, they weren't as susceptible to missile fire as they seem in current games like 0AD. Let's face it, shields are purely cosmetic in 0AD, and as long as directional attacks and directional defence aren't developed, we're always going to run circles in this ranged vs melee discussion. An infantry unit (with shield) being attacked from the front by archers should be able to stand his own very well. But should be very susceptible to ranged attacks from the sides or from the back. This implies real tactics, not dancing units! Currently phalangites for example fight out of formation more than 90% of the time, and considering formations are broke, putting them into formation is a recipe for disaster. I don't need to stress how ridiculous this is.. Melee infantry will never properly come into their own until formations and battalions (and their implied benefits) are fixed and implemented, as well as directionality of attack and defence. I think it's frustrating that there are people who think dancing units are just fine, and there are people that think lack of battalion systems and decent formations isn't an important issue, especially with regard to these kind of discussions.
    1 point
  41. How is it difficult? The changes suggested here are relatively simple and at least in my opinion make the gameplay more immersive. Granted, the above ideas probably are not perfect, yet they would seem to improve upon the current game-state.
    1 point
  42. I fixed the model, it was a long process, please try to optimize your polycount and check for overlapping faces. Thanks for your work, it's commited now.
    1 point
  43. 1 point
  44. This how, look like mixing Hellenistic art with Egyptian
    1 point
  45. Looks like Celtic Kings gets an expansion! http://www.haemimontgames.com/punicwars/ Looks pretty cool, to bad it doesn't look they are going to change any of their gameplay, besides a few minor things
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...