av93

If you want more inspiration from a lore pov, Civ Beyond Earth have also nice ideas to the question, how the humanity would adapt to the future in a new colonized planet: -"Stay human" civ: bio and mechanical tech to enhace the humanity, but clearly separated. Adapt and change the environtment (Terran) Ethos: Human problems, in the space. Dictatorship, corruption, but also freedom fighters, in the space. Gameplay: Standart. Adaptability. - "Cyborg" civ: replace every possible part of the human body by tech to bypass biological limitations. Adapt the environment to humanity and to a computational net. (Protoss). Ethos: Efficiency and egalitarian by the mathematic decisions, but the inflexibility can bring unappealable bold decisions Gameplay: Expensive, Hit hard. - "Gaia" civ: chage the biology of the humanity to match the environment and to perfect itself. (Zerg) Ethos: playing with bioengeenering makes them defenders of life and environment, but also egocentric mind that plays to be God, sacrificing lives contradictorily without caring at all.

https://starcraft.fandom.com/wiki/Protoss_Civil_War IRC, there's a conflict between Tassadar helping and being curious about humans, and Aldaris that don't give a nut and he doesn't care about "purify" all life in the infested planets. I supose that the interesting thing about the last discussion, it's how every faction can have it's shades, giving a more complex factions, instead of the bad vs good guys. Heart of the Swarm kind of try to give it a light/grey shade to the zergs, the ones that lacked colour in the original Starcraft. from a gameplay pov, that also justify conflict inside factions. Star Wars also kind of done this between the new films and the original movies. Seems a general direction of the narrative in the last years

Maybe names could be found after a incial design?: Terran are human (we), adaptative, mechanical, cowboys in the space, with autoritarian dictatorships, but also freedom fighters (even terrorist) Protoss are tech aliens, hit hard but fewr and expensive, saviours but sometimes racist and apply genocide, mix of native american and orientalism. Rounded shapes Zerg are the very bad mindless guys, win by swarming and even suicide units. They want to consume everything, but no individual will, organic shapes. "Revolutionary" tech tree were larva morph intro structures or units, that can even morph more Tvtroopes is a good places to brainstorm stereotypes

Air movement it's already possible. An SWGB spiritual succesor would be cool, but a lot of work

Always thought about having a decent RTS game of our Spanish Civil War. - A lot of ideologies clashing in two sides (fascists, nazis, nationalist, monarchist, conservatives vs republicans, anarchists, communist, stalinists, socialist, liberals...) - Can be seen as a start of the WWII, almost caught by months. Some techs and strategies (tank battalions, heavy air bombings) were tested for first time in SCW. - A lot of foreigners participated in one side from a lot of countries, as a undercovered allies or individual civil volunteers. - Late WWI tech with early WWII tech. Some trench warfare, but also effective tanks and jet aircraft. Mostly bolt rifles, some few SMG.

Thats a nice roadmap and and seems a hell of work. IRC correctly, turret feature have been given a lot of effort But think about releasing the new balance asap, so it can be tested while the other features are being worked on. Releases also refresh interest on people and in the media, atracting potentially new devs

Well, roadmap stopped to be a trustable clue of how everything it's going. If finally Borg mod it's implemented, It would be nice to test it by the main playerbase. I mean, a release always it's a lot of extra work, but 1 year it's a understable time period to justify a release. If I'm following correctly, there's not a big feature half implemented that needs to be finished, or I'm wrong?

What did you expect? It's just a remaster. We have to acknowledge them that they have make a lot of new models for units that shared the same one. Also creeps that have a different level now have also new models

I just don't like dread lords face. I liked more the "undead vampire" over the "demonic furry satyr" head

A very important thing will be perspective. Don't judge until there's a fixed view

Middle ages seems. I dont like the art... Too phony... I really prefer 3. And I think that it's a bad decision calling it 4 (middle ages were done already)

Mostly are conventions, but some roles according loosely from history can be designed. BTW, I think that it's better to make the bonus not related to mainly specific units, but to armour classes: Because I love a middle ground philosphy design between AoE3 and AoE2 in units roles and civs distinction, I would love to have "special units" with some role/stats change, but without overcomplicate the design. Dogs could be one of this special units: I would make them good against workers and light infantry. If Britons are designed as a Rush civs, dogs could be a cheap and fast unit, to support infantry and skirmishers in p1 to harass economy, but later maybe they would be useless because cavalry.

Always thought that for emulate slavism, units should have in the loot propierties a slave point value, so you can train a percentatge of killed units (if every unit killed is one point, training one slave should cost 4, so a 25% of killed units could be slaves). Now with the possibility of exclude certain resources from the trading pool, this is more viable. But I suppose that this is a little bit offtopic

Also the bonus/penalties of woman and man. I'm sure that slaves were used both for both genders to mine and build, for example. From a gameplay POV, the aura is a big load to performance, @Stan`? Also is very micro intensive to place women to men clusters to make them work faster...

My convention would be Spear cavalry They represent shock cavalry, altough not all spear cavalry of all civs would fit this rol, mainly only the eastern civs. -bonus against infantry, they should shred light infantry. - the slowest and heavy armoured cav Sword cavalry A unit convention. As others have said, sword was mainly a secondary sword when riding. - fast cavalry, can catch ranged cav, but not so armoured. - soft counter to light infantry, bonus to other ranged cavalry. Maybe they could lose against spear cavalry one to one, but could be cost effective against them.

But maybe then they should be scorpio and not stone throwers towers? If mercenary camps were a thing, I would make roman/greek mercenary ballistas avaliable (but limited) for everbody

Is not more a problem of acceptance between the team, rather than Borg being willing to implement it?

Not a mahout but a walking man for others animations

Could match with the wounded soldiers animations

Not only the immersive thing, but also one of the core problems IMHO of 0 a.d. Defend and collect resources it's generally better than get the workers to fight. But back to somehow to topic about elephants and farms: what about a real worker that guides the elephant, like the merchant? In this case, the elephant could be unloading grain sacks, and the worker seeding them

It has been like almost 1 year...

Seems nice! Map shouldn't autoreveal in mission mode. Also, the UI doesnt match at all with the dialog boxes (the style of those are better IMHO)

That sources are after Mauryas contact with Alexander, or before? Maybe a mix of Macedonian Stone Thrower with later medieval Indian engines? (mixing Indian aesthetics with Macedonian mechanism) Also would be nice maybe to add rams to Elephant civs (Mauryan, Egypt, Seleucids, Kushites and Carthaginians), and Kushites ( @Sundiata) had stone throwers IRC

Fits in 0 ad timeframe, or it's an imperial era weapon?

The small patches means that is a matter organization, not of testing, that can be done with all the general patch. The mod hasn't been tested already? But IRC my question was regarding the official team desire to include the balance