Thorfinn the Shallow Minded

Not to say that this justifies that choice, but Age of Empires III lacked blood.

I definitely wouldn't be surprised if they went a bit too far with the nerf. Usually that's the way balance patches work.

Saw that game too. Not every day you see Viper that far on the back foot. All said though, it's not surprising with Steppe Lancers. When Rise of the Rajas came out, Vietnamese were overpowered, and Malay were dominant on water-maps. Apparently the developers are going to be hitting that unit pretty hard in an upcoming patch. These are a list of the alleged changes coming up: Gold cost from 30 to 45 Attack speed lower Movement speed lower -2 attack on both normal and elite These changes will make them only 25 resources cheaper than knights but with two less attack. Add to that fact that their attack speed was already a bit slower than the knight's, and their movement rate will probably be at least the same as the knight now, and the result should be a good deal less effective. Time, however, will only tell.

Here's a clearer outline of one of the factions I proposed: Placeholder Name: Nomads (or Horde) Lore: Earth gradually dwindled itself of resources, and humanity had to leave, but all attempts to terraform planets proved expensive and resulted in failure. Instead, the people who survived of the human race did so through intense genetic engineering. Now they roam from planet to planet, taking the resources before finding a new target. The few that remain unaltered humans are the elite, commanding their thralls from the comfort of small habitats suitable for the true remnants of the human race. Bonuses: Nomadic: All buildings are mobile, but there are limits to how many can be built. Training units and researching technology can still be done in a moving structure at the cost of increased time. Scavengers: Resources are gathered faster but are diminished at an even faster rate. Units and Buildings: Cloning Facility: Produces Workers. Worker: Primary economic unit. Collects resources faster than others. Barracks: Produces Scavenger and Grunt. Most weapon upgrades available here. Scavenger: Infantry unit that is able to gather resources like the worker but at a much slower rate. Good cannon-fodder. Grunt: Infantry reinforced with an exoskeleton. Slower than Scavenger but much beefier. Recon Centre: Produces Angel, Scout, and Dragoon. Requires Genetic Engineering Lab and Barracks. Angel: Fast unit capable of flying short distances. Scout: Unit capable of camouflaging. Has a strong sneak attack that reveals it. Slower when cloaked. Dragoon: Cavalry unit that is fastest unit available to the Nomads. Possibly can attack while moving. Emplacement: Self-propelled artillery battery that can also train Sappers. Sapper: Suicide unit does explosion damage when attacking. Genetic Engineering Lab: Area where most technologies that unlock units and provide improvements to existent traits of units. Glider: Unit that can be built that transports units. Not a fast unit, but one that allows for creative attack angles. That's a general template of what I've got. One of the reasons I would say there is some merit to this race is that it would allow for a Starcraft-like faction to exist without just a copy-and-paste of Terran, Protoss, and Zerg. I tried to make for some interesting mechanics that fit with the thematic picture I'm also trying to portray.

Thoughts on buildings: it would be nice for them to move. I see one faction as a nomadic one that is used to exploiting the resources on a planet and then leaving. One of their strengths could be fast but inefficient collection of resources. Their buildings can move, maintaining things like unit production during that time, but if they are idle they can move significantly faster. Some structures could perhaps be even considered more like self-propelled artillery. A huge downside could be a hard cap on how many of each type of structure they could make. Probably they could have a variety of means of transporting troops such as a quick air transport. They would be probably the best faction when it comes to raiding and choosing fights well. Another one could perhaps emphasise buildings that tend to be stationary, but for a nominal cost, they could be teleported to a different location. Their units could be built around providing a variety of bonuses to each other such as movement speed and improved range, making various unit combinations and positioning crucial to effective play-styles. A last faction could maybe have free buildings. These would emerge from the ground usually at a slow rate. The general downside is that typically only a finite number of buildings can be built simultaneously. Perhaps the structures could also have lower hp than others but on the other hand benefit from regenerating hp and some providing healing to surrounding units. Most of their units would tend to be slow, but there could also be faster ones that lose hp at a steady rate. Basically I'm thinking something like space ents. If any of these sound cool, I could try fleshing them out.

I would actually contend with the idea of that that type of lance would require a two hand grip. All of the images you posted lack one critical detail, the massive counterweight. Also, none of those seem to be from the successor kingdoms. Furthermore, the Alexander Mosaic clearly shows Alexander holding a lance of comparable length with one hand. That work is considered to have been a copy of a Hellenistic painting, making a valid piece of contemporary evidence for that kind of fighting style.

Introducing the elephant tower, a mobile building that also functions as a dropsite.

It's rather interesting talking about attack rates of archers since I was just thinking about that. A major difficulty in tackling the issue is that there is little concrete evidence other than one person stating that they can loose arrows from a specific draw weight. An archer might be able to according to a few estimates, shoot 15 arrows in a minute, which I'd say would be viable from a gameplay perspective. I'd say the point that should be for how they would maximise effectiveness is in attacking unarmored combatants; most arrow wounds during the Middle Ages were facial, i.e. the soldier had their visor raised at the time the volley was coming. Obviously there were differences in technology then compared to in the ancient times, but I'd say the point still has some significance.

I think that when considering the addition of a day night cycle, the primary basis for it is graphical. Age of Mythology sort of had one with the way Eclipse god power and Fimblewinter god powers worked. One of the ways that having that really worked for the game was since there were lots of particle effects to enjoy during them. Most non fantastical rts's lack that kind of light show to justify one. Empires Apart had some interesting gameplay mechanics that came into play with day and night, but I don't think that the style really meshed well to make anything cooler.

I personally don't relate to the flak people are giving about the art style. It's definitely a departure from Age of Empires II and Age of Empires III, but I wouldn't say it's too significant if we look at the original game or Age of Mythology, both of which had rather exaggerated graphics that were colourful (Think about the bones that villagers used to attack things and tell me I'm wrong.). Even Age of Empires II was a bit like that in some rather interesting unit designs like berserkers and teutonic knights. None of the proportions are off, and while it's perhaps a bit on the vibrant side, it's not obnoxiously so. The one thing big thing that throws me off is the hoardings on the towers.

Luckily I doubt support will drop on the day of release. The current reaction on steam is around 74% positive. Hardly the best start, but I've heard of worse game releases.

I would be interested to see how you see siege units fitting into the meta (not regarding buildings of course).

I like the clatter sound you have of the shaft hitting the bow, but could it be made a bit higher? As is, it sounds a bit odd, like pieces of bamboo striking. Maybe a demonstration of a medieval warbow might give a better representation of what I'm trying to communicate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4Vd3KP-LnQ&frags=pl%2Cwn

Just another question because I expect this game to have the same graphical quality as a triple A title. Could the explosion particle effect more emerge from the area of impact as opposed to it just popping into existence? Maybe it's just the slo-mo that makes it look a bit problematic.

I wonder if direction could be integrated into the impact based on the vector of the projectile.

Good work thus so far on an aspect that has been severely lacking. That said, I think we need a sound effect for capturing...

Onto the point that Darcreaver makes, I think there is more validity than most of us give credit to. If there is going to be micromanagement, it should feel meaningful rather than just necessary. A lot of the Age of Empires economic decisions unfortunately like that, and I'd say that providing better automation to economy would allow for a much more complex system to exist. I'd personally like trade and farming to be better expanded upon. Farms could gradually eat up the nutrients in soil, decreasing the gathering efficiency and forcing players to have farms planted elsewhere if they want the ground to regain that ability. Trading shouldn't just be a way to instantly generate resources. Importing or exporting precious resources or manufactured wares that could provide buffs in addition to setting tariffs could make for a much more immersive experience. That all said, slaves are an important addition. Having non-citizen residents would be cool as well.

More just scars all over his body based on speculation. He died around the age of 84, having fought basically to the end of his life. I'd expect a few wounds to have shown up in that time. I can check sometime about more distinct features but can't promise anything detailed.

I'd say that would be the case. If we want to go super accurate, getting him to have a limp would give extra browny points. He was apparently short and not handsome, and privately wore a plain cloak. (See Plutarch's Life on him) I'd make his equipment plain to represent his embodiment of Spartan values if we are to take Xenophon and Plutarch at face value.

Agis III is a problematic hero to Sparta. First, his design is sadly lacking. Having more hitpoints is in no way interesting as it offers no new interesting strategies to the Spartan player other than using him as a beefy hoplite. This issue is further exacerbated by the fact that the one thing he is famous for, bravely dying in battle to a superior force, is nothing unique or remarkable in comparison to most any other Spartan king. Leonidas already serves that function. Finally, 0 AD’s vision is to depict nation-states at the height of their power, not when they were simply a regional bully. Thus, I think that a different hero should be used. Enter Agesilaus, whose force of will affected much of Sparta’s foreign policy following the Peloponnesian War. He represents a moment in which the city was at the peak of its power before its collapse in the face of Thebes. Thoughts on Potential Abilities: Horsemen cost reduction (Agesilaus was a firm believer in the use of cavalry, forming one of the first and only effective Spartan cavalry forces.) Attack Aura to melee infantry units (Agesilaus was known be a charismatic person, and despite his having a lame leg, he was able to complete his training like other Spartans. Giving an attack bonus seems like a fair option as a result.) Horse Option: Agesilaus can use a form of packing and unpacking to mount on a horse. This would remove his attack aura if that was implemented at the bonus of extra movement speed. (Agesilaus was an adept horseman, relying on that for most of his daily travel.)

I think the main thing is that people who are knowledgeable don't care to admit that they can't give very decisive evidence of its existence or lack thereof, and I don't criticise them for it. Just saying 'I don't know' does little for the conversation. It's a niche subject. Personally I'd say the current iteration just clashes with the Roman aesthetic in a weird way and feels anachronistic. It's a classical design that has been grafted onto something else with no regard for Roman tastes. Granted, I'm mainly just approaching this from a matter of personal bias, so don't take any of this too personally or seriously. Just to mention so that I don't sound like a snobbish critic, the other designs look really cool.

Could you say the historical precedent for having the face on the shields? Naturally that comes from Greek hoplites, but on the scutum it looks off. I did a quick look on the web and only saw a reenactor using that kind of design. Personally it seems perhaps a bit too far fetched that someone would paint that on that type of shield, but I'd appreciate some insight from someone more knowledgeable about Roman martial artwork than me.

Sorry, that was my mistake in calling Hipparchus that. I meant to say Aristarchus.

Identifying constellations and seeing their how they moved is precisely why it had applications in navigation. Whether those two can be classified as astronomy, most constellations were named by astrologers. Although it's not as if priests researched these phenomena for the explicit purpose of finding one's way, but their research had uses. Astronomy during this time period was of course practised most famously in Alexandria, where astronomers such as Hipparchus basically proposed a heliocentric model of the solar system. This does not however indicate that these natural sciences were of that much use to a common sailor. Most philosophers were elitists and preferred to keep their findings on an academic level, not for things that could be applied for the masses. The main point I wish to make is that just because something had scientific methodologies does not mean that it invalidated incidental findings discovered through less scientific approaches.