Jump to content

Thorfinn the Shallow Minded

Community Historians
  • Posts

    1.094
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by Thorfinn the Shallow Minded

  1. Distance is relevant, and the reason I said that the space between chickens and the Civic Centre is small is because on nine out of ten random map generations it is that case; the chickens are practically hugging the building. If we set the arbitrary distance number to two for soldiers at a gather rate of two, using roughly same equation logic, a single cavalry unit is roughly 2.58 times more efficient than a soldier, and is 1.86 if the gather rate is set to 3. The point is not for cavalry to beat infantry or women in this case. Cavalry are more expensive than the other counterparts and lack flexibility, and in these short distances it would perhaps be a conceivable to put soldiers or women to work on chickens rather than cavalry. That said, your point is otherwise quite valid in that hunting would be practically meaningless outside of this context for non-cavalry units.
  2. This is more an attempt to bring variety to the immediate early game, in which walking distance is not much of an issue due to the animals spawning close to the Civic Centre. It would do little to make hunting better in other cases.
  3. If you look back far enough, there was some pretty nice content made for Elven structures back in the day when I only had double digit posts to my name.
  4. One thing Nescio earlier on proposed that I particularly liked was giving a bonus to building structures like markets and temples within a certain radius of the Civic Centre. This would be a nice "soft" encourager for the player to migrate their farming economy to a different area.
  5. Fair objection. There could however be a marginal increase, bringing the value from 1 to 2 or even just 1.5 that would make the option of putting a few women or men to hunting viable but not optimal.
  6. So given the fact that some people like the current gather rates of cavalry, instead perhaps the other gather rates of citizen-soldiers and women could be adjusted to be almost or just as fast. In that way there would not be a massive opportunity cost in using the initial cavalry unit to scout.
  7. That is precisely why it is being proposed. A military structure used for economic purposes is an oxymoron.
  8. The reason I did so was to compare a task that cavalry tend to do with one that women do as well in the immediate early game. Fair points though.
  9. They definitely have that kind of feel, especially when it comes to the impact with units; that said, there are two things I appreciate about that design: they are easy to make out and they lack the weird trails seen in most Total War games.
  10. The thing is that cavalry were not hunting specialists; I can live with them hunting faster than other units, but to me the current approach makes the unit completely one dimensional outside of combat in the early game. Do you ever scout with your cavalry unit at the beginning of the game? Most people don't and tend to only scout once they are attacking. Personally I would like to see there be a roughly 50% divide of preference of scouting versus hunting depending on build orders. Scouting could reward the player with knowing the locations of key resources and potentially allow them to grab treasures like in some maps while hunting would be a greedier yet riskier option since there would be a complete lack of intel regarding a potential rush. The other issue that primarily sparked this analysis was the fact that in a different thread I proposed that Sparta should lack cavalry at the beginning of the game and be only able to train them in the Town Phase to represent their poor cavalry. This suggestion was shot down by borg for the good reason of cavalry being critical to the early economy. I'm okay with cavalry complementing the economy, but if the problem is that by nerfing their hunting skill they become much worse, maybe there could be another way of buffing them such as having the ability to build outposts, tying into a more reconnaissance approach.
  11. Cavalry gather rates are fast, and to quantify that, I ran a number of tests with Cavalry spawning on the two player Acropolis Bay Map. First I tested the cavalry unit collecting chickens. The result was that the cavalry unit gathered 200 food in roughly 1 minute and 19 seconds (I set it to gather the most efficient group.). In comparison, I set one woman to gather from the nearest berry group (without constructing a dropsite nearby) and was able to collect 50 food in that same amount of time. Her collecting less, however, makes sense since a female unit costs one third the number of resources and has more economic flexibility than its cavalry counterpart at the cost of having next to useless stats for combat purposes. Three women, the equivalent resource cost, only gathered 140 food in that same timeframe mostly due to the pathfinding causing them to bump into each other. As some general comments, even if the women worked at peak efficiency, they still would take up three population which makes them at the immediate early game rather poor gatherers in comparison. Granted, hunting does grow much more inefficient after the few animals within each player's border dies, and building more dropsites is generally difficult. This does not change the fact that early on, there is an absolute no brainer to having the cavalry unit hunt instead of scouting the map. Personally I would like to see there be a validity of either approach if we discount the possibility of cavalry being unable to perform any economic role.
  12. I personally think this sounds fun. It would also be appropriate to potentially have Hamilcar be able to recruit mercenaries while we're at it.
  13. My proposal was a simple and conservative one: not ideal to my views, but a mere suggestion that some might like. The inclusion of Helots at all is problematic for the citizen soldier concept since they were not citizens and were only occasionally soldiers. The same of course goes for Perioikoi, leaving the ironic choice of the Spartan hoplite, both a citizen and a soldier not being a citizen-soldier.
  14. That was my concern as well, but perhaps there is a way around this. First of all, should horsemen gather food at warp speed when it comes to hunting? Personally I find the current rate a bit much. Second, Sparta could compensate by having women gather hunt resources more efficiently.
  15. Ah yes. That is a thing that has been mentioned a fair amount. It's definitely valid. Personally I could see the helot unit being available instead of the skirmisher variant from the Civic Centre. Constructing a barracks would allow for the research of a technology that would allow the player to emancipate a helot unit into a νεοδαμώδεις instead, a skirmisher if we go with that route that would no longer gather but would fight reasonably well.
  16. Since other civilisations have been getting their fair share of recognition, it seems fair to represent Sparta as well. Here are a few ideas I have for further differentiation: Remove the Theatron as it is not representative of Sparta. Make palisade walls only accessible once the Town Phase has been reached to further emphasise their lack of reliance on walls. Make the Syssition available in the Town Phase to allow them to produce Spartans earlier. Have them start with a Skiritae unit instead of a horseman to demonstrate their abysmal cavalry capabilities. Also they should perhaps not be able to train cavalry in the Village Phase. Have them begin with a Spartan hoplite since Sparta had Spartans. Make their helot units cheaper yet weaker.
  17. It's fairly redundant to have druids provide just an attack aura for both cases. If the emphasis of the Britons is on mobility, I would instead make it so that there is a mounted version of the druid. The deer bit seems fantastical at best honestly. A different way to possibly represent it in another manner would be to have it possible to build a 'wicker man.' This would burn and slowly lose hitpoints, but while it is around, it could provide a global attack bonus. Probably there would be a hard limit to having one present at a time.
  18. I like a lot of the thoughts behind this. One thing which does seem impractical, however, is the way that you sketched out specifically how chariots could function. Don't get me wrong. I like the idea behind it; implementation is the issue. Garrisoning one infantry into each individual chariot would take a fair amount of apm that would be impractical in most cases. Instead I would propose one of two options: Make chariots like the Konniks in Age of Empires 2. When the unit dies, an infantry unit spawns in its place. This would have the similar general effect. The alternative might be to have chariots be automatically trained with a single infantry unit garrisoned inside it. Whenever that unit is ungarrisoned, the player would have the option to garrison that unit or a new one in its place or could have the option of training a unit inside the chariot (probably it would take a bit longer than usual). I personally prefer this compared to the other.
  19. Simply speaking, men tend to see better in the dark than women at the cost of having a harder time differentiating colours. Thus, since the fog of war is dark, men should have more line of sight. In seriousness, the issue is not that women can't see that far; there are a few female units that have better line of sight. The problem is that at the moment only women for the most part are dedicated economic units. Introducing non-gender specific workers such as slaves would generally fix this issue.
  20. Honestly I could see the swordsman being purposed as an all-rounder, having a lot of pierce armour but lacking some of the ability to properly chase. Another change I would like to see is reducing line of sight, making it lower than even the maximum range of archers or slingers so that having a screen of units in front would be necessary to maximise the potential of the ranged units.
  21. I think one variable that could seriously affect the dynamic between ranged and melee units is considering the frame delay, the amount of time between the unit being ordered to attack and it executing that order. As far as I saw, the change making turning around take time makes microing the units a lot more awkward. I guess the two questions I have is how long does it take for a unit to do a 180 turn, and how long does it take for most ranged units to actually perform their attacks after ordered (assuming that they are facing the right direction)?
  22. I completely agree that situations such as the Battle of Marathon should be viable.
  23. One of the few games that attempts to model social class in history is Imperator Rome, which has the following: slaves, tribesmen, freemen, citizens, and nobles. Obviously that is a grand strategy game and can make use of more nuanced mechanics, but it does lead to the thought of not only introducing slaves but also freemen to the mix in representing social class. Slaves are straightforward enough. They would serve practically exclusively as economic units. The more nuanced exception could be Sparta. Citizens could just function as per usual, as citizen-soldiers. Freemen are a bit more tricky to depict. In Rome ‘freedmen’ were former slaves that enjoyed a few benefits of a citizen without some of the rights but could not vote. On the other hand there were socii, who according to Polybius made up roughly half of the military. Sparta of course has perioikoi. Athens had a group called metics, that also had to serve in the military. How would these be represented? Freemen could more or less be citizen soldiers with a reduced cost that can only promote once and might not fight as well in general. Technologies could potentially remove that cap or allow for the individual promotion of units. Perhaps mostly freemen would be trained from the Civic Centre while Citizen-Soldiers would be trained from barracks. The one frustration this might cause is that in game it could be difficult to differentiate Freemen from Citizens. Finally come nobles, most of which served as cavalry. Obviously not all cavalry were nobles, but I think that the best way to represent this would be to have most if not all cavalry cost 2 population and be stronger as a result.
  24. The Celts could be a reasonable alternative. Authors such as Polybius were impressed by the dignity by which many Celtic women carried themselves.
  25. I'm against this for a number of reasons: Women in Athenian society had little to no rights. Actually having them have an active role in the workforce outside of potentially trading is generally an exception of the norm. Honestly I would just have them be represented as props inside houses. Athens already has a bonus to researching technologies. Introducing this would be redundancy. If we want to represent Athens in an interesting light, I would look to the fact that in Athens slaves and metics were treated much better than the average place at least according to the Constitution of the Athenians (by Pseudo-Xenophon).
×
×
  • Create New...