Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 2022-08-04 in all areas

  1. 2 points
  2. I agree that borders are rather... spongey. I agree too that walls, palisades, and defensive structures should essentially block enemy border expansion. The parameter in TerritoryInfluence/Weight can be adjusted for this, but also there needs some territory code changes to help prevent the weird territory bubbles that form beyond those blocking structures.
    2 points
  3. Hi everyone, I've created over 2000 tracks of original music and sound effects that you are welcome to freely use in your games and projects. All I ask is to be attributed as described on my website: soundimage.org/ I sincerely hope some of my tracks are helpful. Enjoy! :-)
    1 point
  4. I had a defense tower next to the edge of my land. My neighbour and I had a pretty long common border that was fenced (from my side) with double palisade and towers (that are located behind fences). And at some point the border of my neighbour suddenly expanded towards me which caused me to lose a tower mentioned earlier. Since I had a lot of things going on around I wasn't able to notice that. My builders/workers (20 of them) standing near that tower were killed in cold blood. My critical suggestion is to change the current system of shifting borders. For example, your border can't be taken easily. It can be expanded "inside" your land by your contiguous neighbour only if specific conditions are met. Like whether there is a fence or not. Whether it is made of wood or stone. In my opinion it would be more realistic and force a player to think about border's defense more creatively. I would suggest to make a border system when kind of a fence, it's complexity, damaged/repaired fence, number of defensive towers around determine your border's morality. If you are stingy, then morality goes low and eventually you shouldn't be surprised that your towers "went rogue" and border has shifted. Tower near border could be that guarantee that your land is secured. But the closer that tower to your land's edge the bigger price you must pay. And by price I mean regular resources (like wood or stone) you must donate to that tower. Let's say for maintaining it intact. My conservative suggestion is to make border shifts and giving up your towers more noticeable. Because like I said earlier, when land is big, a lot of things are happening and you just can't see all details.
    1 point
  5. The Palace of the Hindus seemed absurdly thin to me. Is it supposed to be so thin historically? Because it looks more like a piece of wall or a roadside garrison. LoL
    1 point
  6. Shaved_below frequently insults others, especially Kampot. Today I've had enough of him and I have decided to report him. He asked everyone in another game to boycott kampot's host and I joined Kampot nevertheless. He has been proclaiming to be 'the most toxic person' in reza-math's server and has said more unfriendly things there but I won't post them here. Shaved_below is the smurf account of Shyft_Sierra; he also made another account called puddle_of_sperm. @go2die @user1
    1 point
  7. There's 2 things that comes on my mind to keep CAV as it should remain to be : a rushing unit and not a darn spam unit -> remove their ability to capture ( debatable ) --> Limit their pop cap to 15%-20% of total pop (undebatable , it must be) People gonna say, yes but cav cost 50 food more .. i would answer that since you lose your cav at very slower rate than infantery, they cost on the field, less.
    1 point
  8. First Goth Civil Center concept art
    1 point
  9. Turning missiles into homing missiles might not be enough: If a volley hits a soldier, the overkill-missiles would still search for other targets, causing lag. This needs to be prevented too. For example by deactivating this search.
    1 point
  10. @wowgetoffyourcellphone Right, but it's still called Ptolemaic Mercenary Trireme.
    1 point
  11. Removed unproductive discussion. Doesn't add anything to the thread.
    1 point
  12. Do developers play in their own game? UPD:
    1 point
  13. i want anyone reading this, who studies rhetoric, to note how he not once gave an example. 1. was "this discussin" and the other topic i made. ie extremely general, vague, not adressing anything specific, thereby NOT GIVING AN EXAMPLE. 2.general accusation of GENERAL toxicity, again NOT AN EXAMPLE. 3.apparently i get extremely angry when i lose, again NO EXAMPLE. 4. i blame everything on other people, apparently and act like im perfect, but wait.. theres no example of this occuring, its again ANOTHER ACCUSATION. hahaha i say what you do, then you do it again, not adressing what i say, bringing in NEW totally empty baseless bs point and sputters im certain you are not even planning of ever adressing from the moment you even think of them. your mental point of origin is "how to i get a gotcha moment on vinme" not "how do i think like a sane human being who actaully wants to say what they believe, not what they think will make them appear better and those who they emotionally get offended by look worse"
    1 point
  14. how is this qualified as "antics" ? my behaviour is neither amusing, silly or strange(standard definition of antics). define toxic, again with arbitrary allegations, ie something that cant be proven and is interpretable by feelings, just like insult and such. i never hate no nubs, ie inexperienced bad players, i even coach many of them in 1v1s for fun, i have 0 problems or anomous towards a player that tries to play well but just cant. i do get annoyed by people who are annoying, ie intentionally losing, even when told what to do, intentionally not doing it out of malice or stubbornness(foten not that they believe im incorrect, but they just dont want to do it, becuase they feel like it), then they deny any wrong doing, and accuse me of wrong doing. if they simply admit they made a mistake or that they werent correct to intentionally lose, or be unreasonable, id leave them alone, but sometimes they dont and they try to blame me instead. i dont get angry when i lose, i enjoy games where odds are against me the most, given usually won games are easy and there is no challenge, plenty of room to make mistakes and still wind up ahead. i blame everything on other people and act like im perfect? how so? can you elaborate on this obviously empty and baseless insult/point and sputter, as you see im giving you the pretend benefit of the doubt, ie im still letting you explain, even though saying something of this sort WITHOUT PROOF is point and sputter by default. i dont pretend to be uncertain about things im certain about, this is often misinterpreted by mentally weak people as arrogance, becuase they believe somehow, being soft and pretend polite, in conversation is a virtue that will absolve them of any inapropriate behaviour becuase they are "nice". acting uncertain, or timid, indirect, pretending to expect equal or respectable opinions from another, who has proven to not be deserving of any respect is NOT humility, its stupidity. "it coudlnt be me"? thats just a moot point, accusing someone of being arrogant or conceited, self assured etc. how is that an argument? i can say same about you, and about 100% of all people, given everyone believes what they think, obviously, thats self evident, literally. i still give people all the room to explain their opinions, question them, etc, adress what they say thoroughly, instead of skimming like you did, which is for a fact arrogant and proof of exactly the thing you had described. you must understand that profanities, are just words, they dont determine a persons character whatsoever, 1 person being 100% polite is in no way better or more respectable, than another who uses profanities. in fact polite people are generally the most malevolent and manipulative are the ones who are polite given they generally hide their intent and people who have reason to put effort into hiding their intent are dishonest. generally less malevolent people have less reason to be dishonest. we must all seek to question and be weary of polite people.
    1 point
  15. oh and i forgot, my antics? what antics? can give at least 1 example? another empty accusation, and statment "people" lol, what people, its just you, who tries to word things to state emotional empty attacks, as fact. "im right, everyone knows im right, and anyone whod doubt me is clearly wrong and not worth talking to" every time one of your empty attacks gets easily dismantled you move on to another point and sputter, theres no end to it, so i ask you adress replies, instead of posting more and more endless point and sputters hoping something sticks.
    1 point
  16. yes, personal emotion, ie you have emotional bias, and spew bullshit malicious nonsense with "polite" pretend undertone, to try and discredit me. Id say for a fact, that would be very well defined as "lasing out" so yes, you are lashing out. unhinged pargraphs? what part did you find unhinged, please give at least 1 example, given you accuse me of writing many paragraphs, this task should be very simple, but ofc its not, given you have 0 basis for your pointing and sputtering. you shouldve gotten more screenshots to convince people of what exactly? im sure there are people who were specs, whod confirm what happened, and i assume you wont accuse me of denying anything that happened, that did happen. im just ranting at people? every sentence i write has a point, and i dont get derailed to unrelated subjects, there is no "Rant" there you go again @BreakfastBurrito_007 again with another empty insult for the thousandth time, 0 self respect clearly. the reason i got kicked, was becuase woodpecker was being unreasonable, for whatever reason. do you want people, to put up with cheating, yours and other peoples shameful behaviour, in relation to me simply opposing cheating, saying things like "just dont worry about it" or "you are overreacting" , "its just a game" ruins the game, people who actively promote in this manner, cheating, and help cheaters, dont deserve any respect whatsoever and are not to be taken seriously. the host was the only one who decided, to kick me, there was NO discussion among players, the spectators of course are irrelevant given they had no right to decide what us players should do, but they also didnt side with said, at all whatsoever. again another accusation, its tiresome, but id rather reply to this nonsense, to avoid someone, who is just skimming and not putting effort into looking at details, to misinterpret you or what you write as in any way reasonable, polite, legitimate or respectable. its rare for a person to have 90% of what they say/write come out as pure manipulative virtue signalling bs,i guess thats some sick form of accomplishment in a sense to be so motivated by unhinged emotion almost all that you say is wrong, and no this isnt an insult, its my opinion that i fully believe in, 90% of what you say is total bs.
    1 point
  17. I don't think cav should be 2 pop. Cav spam can be annoying when players use them as a replacement for infantry, just because they are stronger and do more damage. I would prefer the mobility being the primary advantage over infantry, so a damage nerf should be fine here. One issue (which I have attempted to address) is that cavalry can see much farther than infantry, which makes them much harder to track down and kill. I think the best approach is to fix gameplay so that cavalry counters are more effective.
    1 point
  18. StarGUI9.zip StarGUI version 9 coming: New Eurasian Steppe:
    1 point
  19. I've always thought cav were a little too strong this alpha. I've thought the two most problematic aspects of cav are: (1) Their ability to capture barracks super fast because this allows a very small and fast group to counterattack and eliminate an enemies' production abilities. This can easily be fixed by lowering their capture attack, which increased from 2 in a23 to 2.5 in a25; and (2) Their strength relative to inf. A simple nerf to any of their attack/health stats (i.e., dmg, health, and/or armor values). I don't think this should be a big nerf, but they do feel slightly too strong. Alternatively, they could become more expensive, which would make them more difficult to spam. I think a cost nerf is less preferred because that will impact early game more. I'm not a fan of the changing pop cost because that doesn't change their underlying strength, which is the real problem, and only limits the number of units that you can make of them, which mostly limits their production only when players are at max pop. I'm also just not a fan of limiting what units players can build, so a hard cap (i.e., 15% of total pop) is less favorable--I think we should just adjust the underlying stats and lets players make what they want.
    1 point
  20. But the vision is still longer if both units aren’t moving. The logic is inconsistent. A bit off topic, but this reminds me of how I think vision range should reflect what a unit is doing at any given time so that units actively engaged in eco/fighting should have the shortest vision, units walking/riding should have medium ranges vision, and units standing still should have the longest vision. That seems far more realistic than the current scenario and gets at the “distraction” idea you bring up
    1 point
  21. I think the "Attack" block looks horrible with those three different indents. "Poisoned" attack tells me it's poisonous; do we really need that sentence telling us that the unit causes poison damage? What's that "(extends)"?
    1 point
  22. 1 point
  23. I had no issues with the minimap we currently have, and I am a bit worried about those larger markers covering up certain info
    1 point
  24. if you retouch this, it can be used for your mod. "After life". Religious tech. Wind turbine (windmill) needs to be removed.
    1 point
  25. https://monster.fandom.com/wiki/Cadejo https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadejo Related with actual mesoamerican believes. my in-laws believe in this creature.
    1 point
  26. Origin. North , Central and South America were relatively lonely places for our species 13,000 years ago. The continents were the last major landmasses in the world to be populated by Homo sapiens. The pre-Columbian era incorporates all period subdivisions in the history and prehistory of the Americas before the appearance of significant European influences on the American continents, spanning the time of the original settlement in the Upper Paleolithic to European colonization during the Early Modern period. The term Pre-Columbian is used especially often in the context of the great indigenous civilizations of the Americas, such as those of Mesoamerica (the Olmec, the Toltec, the Teotihuacano, the Zapotec, the Mixtec, the Aztec, and the Maya) and the Andes (Inca, Moche, Muisca, Cañaris). Mesoamerica is a historical region and cultural area in southern North America and most of Central America. It extends from approximately central Mexico through Belize, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and northern Costa Rica. Within this region pre-Columbian societies flourished for more than 3,000 years before the Spanish colonization of the Americas. Mesoamerica was the site of two of the most profound historical transformations in world history: primary urban generation, and the formation of New World cultures out of the long encounters among indigenous, European, African and Asian cultures. As a cultural area, Mesoamerica is defined by a mosaic of cultural traits developed and shared by its indigenous cultures. Beginning as early as 7000 BC, the domestication of cacao, maize, beans, tomato, avocado, vanilla, squash and chili, as well as the turkey and dog, resulted in a transition from paleo-Indian hunter-gatherer tribal groupings to the organization of sedentary agricultural villages. In the subsequent Formative period, agriculture and cultural traits such as a complex mythological and religious tradition, a vigesimal numeric system, a complex calendric system, a tradition of ball playing, and a distinct architectural style, were diffused through the area. Also in this period, villages began to become socially stratified and develop into chiefdoms. Large ceremonial centers were built, interconnected by a network of trade routes for the exchange of luxury goods, such as obsidian, jade, cacao, cinnabar, Spondylus shells, hematite, and ceramics. While Mesoamerican civilization knew of the wheel and basic metallurgy, neither of these became technologically relevant. All iron technologies must be replaced.
    1 point
  27. The Mesoamerican book was typically written with brush and colored inks on a paper prepared from the inner bark of the ficus amacus. The book consisted of a long strip of the prepared bark, which was folded like a screenfold to define individual pages. The pages were often covered and protected by elaborately carved book boards. Some books were composed of square pages while others were composed of rectangular pages.
    1 point
  28. The names given to the days, months, and years in the Mesoamerican calendar came, for the most part, from animals, flowers, heavenly bodies, and cultural concepts that held symbolic significance in Mesoamerican culture. This calendar was used throughout the history of Mesoamerican by nearly every culture. Even today, several Maya groups in Guatemala, including the K'iche', Q'eqchi', Kaqchikel, and the Mixe people of Oaxaca continue using modernized forms of the Mesoamerican calendar.
    1 point
  29. Mesoamerica lacked animals suitable for domestication, most notably domesticated large ungulates. The lack of draft animals for transportation is one notable difference between Mesoamerica and the cultures of the South American Andes. Other animals, including the duck, dogs, and turkey, were domesticated. Turkey was the first to be domesticated locally, around 3500 BCE.[24] Dogs were the primary source of animal protein in ancient Mesoamerica,[25] and dog bones are common in midden deposits throughout the region. in trading on the market. They also hunted for luxury items, such as feline fur and bird plumage.
    1 point
  30. Nerf mercenary cav, up to 120 metal by unit and train instant after nerf the first mine metal and stone to 1000 ressource instead 5000
    1 point
  31. Cossacks and other games from the same developer had some of this features implemented. You could not simply destroy houses. After deleting the buildings, they lost most of their health and slowly burned down. If repaired over a certain health level they could be saved, which in my opinion is quiet realistic, because if you can't hold a captured city you would try to burn it down. In American conquest they also made ranged units fight with daggers when melee units came close. If implementation of a second attack is to hard, one could also add minimum range, so ranged units have to run away to fire as in aoe2.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...