Jump to content

Thorfinn the Shallow Minded

Community Historians
  • Posts

    1.170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Posts posted by Thorfinn the Shallow Minded

  1. I am inclined to agree with the above comment. I personally would say that it would be better to have there be less of an emphasis on a counter relationship between units and more of a system which deals with the formation interaction.

  2. @ Second query: Yes, there is a new Roman unit according to the change log. It is, as far as I can say, a javelin cavalryman that would help the romans counter pesky skirmishers and archers better. Its generic name is Italic Allied Cavalry, or properly in the ancient Italic language, Italiko Syndemeno Hippiko.

    Disclaimer: The last phrase was transcribed from modern Greek so do not count on it being so.

    • Like 1
  3. The following discussion focus solely on Marian reforms not other faction related reforms. Due to the nature of the title, discussion regarding other faction's reform is acceptable.

    Actually it is relevant to mention other reforms, but since you yourself stated that the title makes such topic acceptable, I suppose we are in agreement. The thing that should be asked is if there would be any game improvement made by implementing any of the above reforms and if so how?

  4. The primary suggestion I make does not consist of that many difficulties. Allow me to elaborate. For the Romans, the Marian reforms would only require one unit, which exists in game. Obviously a previous one could be introduced if possible, but even that is unnecessary. The Spartan reforms would be quite simple I should think. The Perioikoi could possibly become hoplite peltast hybrids at some point while the Spartiate would change from a hoplite to a pikeman. (Another unit which exists.) The Athenian reform would be similarly simple. (The champions are post-reform so they could be unlocked or upgraded upon research while peltasts require only a few changes which are not that hard. (consider the possibility of using Macedonian skirmisher assets)) The Macedonians would be pretty easy to do also since it requires simply using assets of the generic Hellenes. That leaves it to the Ptolemies and the Seleucids, and I am having a difficult time envisioning much anything for them other than Romanization as Sighvatr mentioned.

    • Like 2
  5. I am not actually opposed at all to the idea of introducing reforms to the Romans in game. It would introduce an intriguing aspect to the game which could overlap over to other nations. To that extent then, the Macedonians could commence the game with hoplites and then alter them to pikemen, the Spartans could perhaps do the same later, the Athenians could have a similar mechanic with upgrading their peltasts to ridiculously powerful javelin/hoplite hybrids. Even the Persians could have a technology for changing their infantry to a hoplite form.

    • Like 2
  6. The limitation of resources should probably be something possibly managed by the pre-game settings, but scarcity of them introduces two important aspects of the game which characterize different phases of it. The first phase, (not as in the village, town, et cetera) which could be called mid-game, is a period of intense struggle for territory so that nations will be able to exploit the resources which they fight over. When practically every resource is exhausted, there initiates the late game phase, where resources are acquired through trade, farming, and bartering. Thus, by having very limited resources, the game has stages which make it develop into a different game experience from one moment to the next.

  7. I have encountered difficulties in the 0 A.D. menu. When I attempt to press anything at the bottom-right corner, there is no response. That basically means that I cannot start any games I set up. I use Macintosh OSX 10.8.4 on a fairly high end laptop. Thanks if it can be fixed in any way. I have grown rather fond of the game and hate to be deprived of the chance to even playing it.

  8. Sorry that I have not replied for literal months. I have been quite busy with school courses for a good while and have not felt motivated enough to write another article. Now to answer the questions.

    Not a bad blurb! Can I put it into the Spartans house entity as-is? It's good enough for a simple thing like a house, while more complex topics would get longer articles. But since the entity blurbs don't have an attribution system, I would amend your text to "According to Plutarch, Spartan houses were..." Is that acceptable?

    Thank you for the supportive words. I always found Lycurgus's law code to be one of the most interesting sort as of yet. Feel free to change it as you wish.

    The second made the doors what? I would assume you mean only allowed doors constructed with saws as tools, but either way I think that part of that sentence needs some work.

    (Face Palm!) Sloppy me. I have revised to what I consider a more acceptable form. I will try to be a bit more careful next time.

    I will in the next few months attempt to acheive the daunting task of writing a biography on Iphikrates. While I do have a few ancient sources that mention him, would any of you be able to refer me to a reliable biography on him? Thanks again. Expect another article in a couple months.

    • Like 1
  9. Sanderd: for the hero auras of Hamilcar and Hannibal, I propose the following. Hamilcar, mercenaries are more effectictive around him (Hamilcar Barca was a crucial leader in crushing the mercenary revolts.). Hannibal could increase the rate that soldiers move at while in the column formation and could partly cloak soldiers from enemy line of sight until x distance to simulate his wily battle mannerisms.

×
×
  • Create New...