av93

What is the general opinion on this? It favours rushing, and adds deeper strategy placement and control map thinking.

Well, in a new founded colony away from home, berries have sense in aoe3

Regicide: a no attacking unit could be changed instead of a hero Survival: first wave can be delayed Unknown nomad: You could add additional starting units. (all are easy changes) Instead of adapting the important core decision, adapt the secondary game modes.

When I have time I will write on this. But phase I could be a rock-paper-scissor of spearman (Rush)>tower (Turtle)>javelin cav (Rush) Next tier could add ranged infantry to kill spearman and javelin cav, and melee cav to kill ranged infantry and javelin cav if caught.

Or cavalry shouldn't be able to gather food. Even if you want keep citizien-soldiers, it feels weird cavalry working with herdables: it should be able to only hunt wild animals. But this doesn't fix the problem in some maps.

When I was talking about resources managing, I was talking in a broader view: should I expand, should I build first workers, or soldiers... I was talking about decisions, about time, rather than gameplay. I'm for a low micro economy. I will continue later

I know that there's a lot here being said. Just as a summary or to talk about my vision, here is it. Newer ideas on others fields, but lets start with general vision and economy 1. Realism. The game should be gameplay based on history or historical plausible facts, not a simulator. Gameplay should be a superior objective. 2.Pace of the game: Would like to design a game around 20-30 minutes. 1-hour game should be achievable with some game modes, but it's not the main aim. 3.Economy: RTS are primary economical games: how you manage your resources and try to choke the enemy incomes. In the long run, a player with more resources control should win. So, in general there shouldn't be infinite supplies of resources or those should be marginal (except food to no microing farms). Shouldn't be very microintensive, to allow more focus on decisions and battling. Resource wise, it should be very symmetrical. No need of provinces but some kind of starcraft resource placement divided by zones with resources spots. Eyecandy and art object should break the monotony of the space, but not the resources. I prefer fewer workers with fewer slots of workable resources. Trees could be grouped into Forests (a single entity)1 with some kind of workable points when the unit plays the axe animation, although individual and don't workable trees could embellish the environment. Huntables it's the only problematic "spot" to redesign. The overall feel should be something like, not only I have 10 workers on food, but I have 2/3 of the resources points being worked. Think something like Aoe meets Dawn of War 1. Only very rare case units should cost more than 2 resources I have 2 design layout ideas: -Traditional aoeish: food, wood, stone, metal, with traditional scheme of uses. or - 5 resource. Also with traditional scheme of uses, following DarcReaver proposal, a 5 resource could be added. Don't care about the name of the resource itself, but in my head could be a some kind of high decision and build order making. For example, it could be "money": a resource only gathered by trade, or autogathered in the markets. It could have 3 uses: It could be a more than normal profitable resource for bartering, buying mercenaries (that would always cost this 5th resource) or researching special techs (I'm not talking about only unique techs). Think like aoe3 envoys, that help you to build a strategy. That kind of feel could be achieved with the cost being always numbers multiples of 100, tied to some "level" feel. - Traditional scheme of uses: *food (main resource for progression, units and techs) *wood (buildings, techs and trash units) *metal (techs and no trash units) *stone (defensive buildings, defensive techs, maybe advanced building and militar buildings Other *Corrals feels redundant. For a infinite supply of food, you have farms. Corralling animals to generate resources or cost reductions feels a little out of place IMHO, and unnecessary micro. The models feels a little out of place for cavalry techs or allowance of cavalry production (too small for a stable). MAYBE it could replace farms for the first phase if farms can only be build on farmlands spots away from the starting location, but they should be autoproducing. *Trading congas should be erased. Don't know if limiting trading units or with another idea. Market or Trading spot from aoeIII feels like giving a good strategic edge to the maps. *Bartering shouldn't restore. It should decay with the buying at medium pace, making impossible to sustain the war with unlimited food. *Metal and stone shouldn't be in CC range. (1) Reducing forest to single entities allows to: fewer lag, better resource design management, ability to spawn auras related to the entity like ambushing. I would change them to don't obstruct the units.Also this would help pathfinding (I think that Delenda Est have done this before) Will continue tomorrow

Well, an interesting aoeish way regarding uniqueness of civs would be something like, in cavalry area, having 2 techs: one improve speed and another HP. Most civs should have available only one of them, bending to fast but more fragile, or slower and sturdier cav. Cavalry civs could have both. As example. Would try to write my general gameplay proposal if there's some idea that can be borrowed or criticized (in my own topic). If it helps a little, i'm happy.

Limiting trader units reduces most issues.

IMHO "civilization" generally implies a State, and not all the factions that are represented in 0 a.d have an State organization. But an argument in favour of keep it, it's that level the "factions" to the same, dignifying "barbarian" cultures (they really weren't "barbarians")

@DarcReaver, whats your next move?

I found this, maybe it's helpful for someone. https://gamedesignconcepts.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/level-16-game-balance/

Esperate a que @Enrique te diga. Aprovecho que te menciono, porque el mensaje que le puedas dejar a él, podria ser génerico para hispanoablantes.

Also, my proposal would be that only the CC spearman are citizien worker, and those can't level up.

I agree overall with DarcReaver, except the tone... In short, you're talking about cost of opportunities.

They won a prize, using a few of costume art and data. They weren't be able to create and animate a gunpowder unit.

Temple of Amun could be the wonder

I would suggest Scythians, as a nomadic civ for cultural and gameplay pov

Well, IRC, that was a decision made by Mythos, suggested somehow by me. My first proposal was that Carthaginians should choose between 2 of the 3 embassies, disallowing 1 to build. I think that currently you can't choose between 3 techs (only pairs works), but my intention wasn't limiting to 2 the numbers if embassies. As you said, a merc civ that can build only 2 embassies doesn't have sense

En esta vida no todo esta regido por una búsqueda de beneficios económicos. Como han dicho, este proyecto es básicamente un hobby para sus desarrolladores. Y lleva más de 13 años. Aquí no hay ni clientes ni ninguna intención de marketing, porque no se está vendiendo ningún producto. Hay un poco de publicidad para atraer más desarrolladores y que la gente juegue, pero hay que recordar que el juego esta en fase alpha: no está acabado. Los desarrolladores son conscientes de todas las cosas que has mencionado en el primer mensaje, y en función de la motivación, la disponibilidad y el tiempo las irán añadiendo. Aunque yo no estoy de acuerdo en algunas cuestiones de diseño (roles de unidades, etc.), es tan fácil como hacer un mod (por ejemplo el Delenda Est) e implementarlo tu mismo (buena parte del juego se puede modificar sin saber nada de programación y algo de inglés)... además es bastante probable que los desarrolladores se centren en las dinámicas del juego, el balanceo y el diseño cuando acaben de tener todas las funciones y características que vean necesarias (en la fase Beta). Moddb es una de las mayores páginas dedicadas a el mundo del modding. Y el hecho de que tus amigos se hayan cansado es una cuestion de tu entorno cercano (subjetiva), habría que ver el número de descargas/jugadores online y desarolladores activos para ver realmente si el proyecto está creciendo o no. Seguramente es fluctuante y crece cuando hay nuevas versiones, pero si lo vemos en perspectiva de años, el juego ha y está creciendo. Y el juego no ha evolucionado a peor: he jugado todas las alphas y el cambio se nota. Finalmente el lag no depende solo de servidores: como en muchos juegos se trata de una conexión entre jugadores en el que uno hace de servidor: ahí entra la calidad de conexión entre estos, pero mayoritariamente el lag es producto del calculo del movimiento de las tropas (el pathfinding). Es una cuestión muy difícil de hacer, que a la vez sea inteligente pero optimizada.

Ya lo solucione yo!

This Phabricator will eventually replace the track system? Eyecandy/Cheat unit!

Should be fixed now

Nice buildings! I really appreciate this project. Historical RTS games have transmitted a lot of learning desires, but the most famous of them are basically eurocentric view. Showing African cultures being more than loincloth warriors it's very important. A pity that African Kingdoms and Rise of Rajas have been released this years. There's no conscience of the effects that could have had if that expansions had been released when the original AoE days. Back to topic, what about army?

Somewhere I read than there's no reference about Iberian ships... There you have one, and in the article, it says is the second ship found. It's a trade ship, for a 4-5 days trip. About April there would be starting an exposition, and maybe there would be some artistic reconstruction of the full ship. http://www.lavanguardia.com/local/girona/20170101/412998512665/arqueologos-reproducen-3d-barco-ibero-cap-de-creus.html