Prodigal Son

Based them on their real traits, and since most of them tried to establish an Athenian hegemony or counter rising threats to it's existence, most of them were aggressive. I know some have major similarities as they are but they can be reworked accordingly by the team to better fit various roles. Other factions should have much more variety.

Did some Athenian ones, tell me if they're any good: (first 3 by Mythos, Italics are my added ideas on them) 1) Alcibiades AI Personality: Overconfident, even when defeat is inevitable. Boisterous. Quick. Backstabber. Raider. Expansionist. Oligarch.Strategies: Raids a lot. Attacks often with small to medium forces. Doesn't build walls at all. In team matches, has a 10% chance of switching allegiance on his ally if tributed enough resources. Tries to build his 1st expansion rather quickly, at the 10 minute mark if possible. Builds new expansions often and whenever possible, even if he can't defend them (this guy will probably lose lots of Civic Centers in the course of a match). Favors naval expansion and raiding on water maps (he fought mostly as admiral besides some sieges and raids).2) Pericles AI Personality: Thoughtful. Eloquent (and comforting/convincing with his advice to the player as an ally when you’re pressed hard). Democratic (but despotic over allies, might ask for resources in return for sparing units for allied protection or “to build something huge”). Defensive. Turtler. Builder.Strategies: Turtler, so builds lots of defenses, walls, towers, etc., around his starting base, while being fairly aggressive with his navy. Tends to build more Temples and other structures, and goes for the Wonder victory more aggressively than other Athenian AIs. When he expands he prefers to do so by destroying enemy expansions and building on them (he sent off many settlers, most of them replacing captured enemy or revolted allied populations - could work with capturing instead of destroying as favored tactic, which fits most other Athenians AIs as well)3) Themistocles AI Personality: Quick wit. Humorous. Cunning. Aggressive. Alliance builder. Democrat.Strategies: This AI is the most aggressive with the navy and builds more docks than the other Athenian AI variations (Aims for having more ships than any other player?). He goes for the Long Walls upgrade as soon as possible and uses stone walls to section off parts of the map. He is extra aggressive against the opponent in the other team who is playing as the Persians. He also temps other players on the enemy team to join his team with promises of tribute, especially if those enemy players are Greek or Successor factions. He might even send some chats/taunts to individuals in the enemy team to sow dissent, and even lie about other players. 4) Miltiades AI Personality: Vengeful. Oligarch. Aggressive. Strategies: Likes mass hoplite armies (since he's in the early era of almost exclusively hoplite warfare) and also Thracian peltasts (due to his Thracian rule). Favors upgrades to these units. Attacks frequently, especially vs enemies who have attacked him first (and Persians?). Builds a fleet on naval maps but doesn’t focus on it as much as the previous Athenian AIs. 5) Cimon AI Personality: Oligarch. Aggressive. Builder. Alliance builder.Strategies: Likes alliances, especially with Spartans. Favors attacks, especially on Persians. Builds temples and walls and civic buildings. Slightly in favor of hoplites and peltasts over other units (Thracian ties like his father Miltiades), slight naval focus on water maps. 6) Thrasybulus AI Personality: Democrat. Aggressive. Expansionist. Loudmouth but good speaker. Alliance builder. Stubborn/Persistent.Strategies: Frequent naval victor, focuses on navy on water maps. Likes to attack and expand, especially against spartans and athenian oligarchs. Might attack even when outnumbered. Likes diplomacy and asking for tributes. Wall builder. 7) Iphicrates AI Personality: Democrat. Aggressive. Expansionist. Reformer.Strategies: Focuses on military tech upgrades. Likes ranged and champion units, especially peltasts, marines and the city guard (with smaller shield and longer spear i think those represent iphicratian hoplites right?). Attacks, raids and expands quite a lot, especially vs spartans. 8) Demosthenes AI Personality: Democrat. Great speaker (should have some of the most impressive taunts, and some special badmouthing for everyone allied to a Phillip AI). Alliance builder.Strategies: Focuses on upgrades that make construction, recruitment and technology faster/cheaper (could be the athenian boomer?). Likes alliances. Favours attacks against macedonians and tries to convince his allies to attack them as well. Naval focus on water maps. 9) Leosthenes AI Personality: Democrat. Prestigious. Alliance Builder. Aggressive. Reckless.Strategies: Recruits a huge, balanced army, the most cavalry heavy of all athenian AIs (they had thessalians on their side among others during the Lamian War, could even make him focus mostly on cavalry). Loves alliances, especially with other Greeks. Aggressive, especially vs macedonians. Might storm enemy defenses even without enough siege equipment.

Could be one way of doing it, but it would be better if each faction's boomer for example plays a little differently depending on the actual's charachers personality. Or one faction could have two different raiders if it was a common strategy for them.

No clue on coding difficulty but if we settle them to be this way (or anyway, just having knowledge of how many to do: 3, 7, 8, more for the team to choose from?) I could come up with a list of personality proposals per faction accordingly to Mythos' format, and maybe adding some more details.

Yup, got you:) Still differentiation should focus on giving various strengths and weaknesses, not making some of them overall much stronger/weaker by default, when difficulty can sort that. So a naval focus AI will be stronger on naval maps, while a raider and a boomer AI on the same difficulty should be approximately equals to each other on a land map. Made me think: Maybe add AI personalities per faction equal to max player number (8?) minus one (or 8 for a round number), so we can have every AI under a different name on any situation?

I thought difficulty would be another setting additional to the AI character. Besides that, agreed on the rest, that's kinda what I said with different pros and cons, giving (dis)advantages depending on the situation/map etc.

I like it, good idea:) However it's best to have them with different pros and cons rather than stronger or weaker. Alcibiades as described here should be a lot weaker than the other two. Also how about, instead of Alcibiades, someone who mostly lead Athenian land forces? (cause he mostly fought sea battles while on Athenian side, like the other two, and for the most part he fought against Athens). Like Iphicrates (reform/tech focus - light troops & champions, offensive, anti-Spartan), Miltiades (mass hoplites, anti-Persian), Chremonides or Leosthenes (offensive, with a slight focus on cavalry compared to other Athenian personalities, Greek diplomacy, pro-Ptolemaic, anti-Macedonian).

To me they look more like AOM than AOEO. They're great, even if somewhat different. I think you guys are severely exaggerating it, just look at this: However some parts of the game have minor (but still bigger than the ptolemaic structures) visual cohesion issues, like the Persian Ram (and ranged siege weapons to a point), some ships and some environmental textures.

Athens: CononChremonidesMacedonians: Alexander I of EpirusAlexander II Of EpirusEumenesCassanderPerdiccasCraterusArchelaus I of Macedon (slightly before the period that portrays them but he paved the road for Philip and Alexander).Persians: DatesMardoniusArtafernesMemnon The RhodianAriobarzanesCyrus the YoungerArtaxerxes V (Bessus)Could also add many satrap names but I guess noPtolemies: Scopas of AetoliaSeleucids: AchaeusCould use some Bactrian and Pergamene names like Epirot ones for Macedon?I'd also remove those after Sidetes, since they where essentialy puppet kingsSpartans: Cleomenes III (the one who did the pike reform)CleombrotusPausaniasNabisAreusAdd I/II etc like for other civs?Romans: Many of the existing general names are post-marian. I'd replace them with others like the following unless marian reforms are addedLucius Aemilius Paullus MacedonicusGaius Marius (could be used I guess)Quintus Caecilius Metellus MacedonicusQuintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus CunctatorTitus Quinctius FlamininusLucius Mummius AchaicusManius Curius DentatusPublius Decius MusPublius Valerius LaevinusLucius Cornelius Scipio AsiaticusPublius Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus Africanus NumantinusGaius Claudius NeroGaius Terentius VarroLucius Aemilius PaullusMarcus Claudius MarcellusGaius Flaminius NeposMarcus Atilius RegulusAnother way of doing it could be limiting the AI names to the few most iconic ones per faction. Not sure what's best here, covering more parts of history or giving something more memorable? Maybe each AI name could also be accompanied by it's translation in the language of the player's civ. So when facing "Kurush The Great" as Athens, you would be getting something like "Kurush The Great (Cyros o Megas)".

The new map looks great:) Btw are those new ground textures or different lighting effects? Either way it's beautiful. Also, will ground texture cohesion get some love in time? It usually needs some better overlapping at the edge points between different ground types and on the visual style as well. Both in quality and it's darkness/saturation/etc. Lastly I'd suggest making berry bushes a bit more obvious while on grass.

I like all three Evil Dead and Braindead as well. I always thought it's funny how Braindead and LOTR are by the same director.

They look good to me. Could make the all a standard length but it might not be the best as description. What's it with the extra civs like Pontians, Pergamenes, Lusitanians, Nubians and Thracians? The rest could be part 2 civs I guess, with some of them fitting for both parts, but those are BC civs. Are they some minifactions that are sure to make it?

An alternative male villager (with all the functions of females) in the editor should do imo. There's one already, the slave, Greek looking though. Maybe one for each civ?

Yeah this issue has annoyed me as well, but I'm pretty sure it will be fixed in time.

This is sad news, it will delay the game at least a little bit. But it's your choice and job anyway. Btw I loved your Diadochi mod for RTW (you're the same Redfox right?).

I think this somewhat covers it, saying the funds will go to hire Redfox for a year: http://play0ad.com/indiegogo-fundraiser-wrap-up/

The latest album (early 2013) from my favorite band:

I'd like someone from the team (Mythos seems to be the one mostly in charge of creating civ roosters) to give an idea on the scale of minifactions possible building and unit list, so we can propose better specifics. Will they have AI? Or be defended by default units as you suggested here. Or even be undefended (if so they could be just one building with a few trainable units, if they don't have AI this could be the best option, so we can include many of them, they won't take much space in the map or cause lag. However I'd prefer them to have AI and a small building variety)Should they have say, 1 Hero, 1 Champion, 1 special Tech each? - Would be great but will need extra work for the team.I'd like to see at least Armenians, Achaean League (could replace Thessaly even though they don't have an interesting unique unit like Thessalian Cavalry, but were more powerful) and a Steppe Tribe in the list, to me they were more important for the time period than others included.Celtiberians is ok, if anything to balance the mini civs with so many Greek/Successor ones.

Yeah Total Recall is great as well. I like movies from most genres, but some favorites besides sci-fi are b-movies (especially horror ones), historical, fantasy and satire. This one's great as well. Mix of sociopolitical satire and fiction again.

Two of my favorites, Starship Troopers 1 & 3. Militaristic humans vs allien bugs for some of the best socio-political satire I've seen. The original book though is promoting militarism so they became confusing for many people.

I agree that having both Dalmatians and Illyrians is an overkill. And maybe Dacians should be left for part 2, no big interaction between them and the playable factions in the BC times. Other possible ones could be: Some Scythian/Sarmatian Tribe. Even if left for part 2 as full mechanics, a version with no extra ones could be in part 1 as they were important and with big interaction with greek colonies, macedonians and persians.Pergamon (Greek). Kinda important city-state for the period who managed to control most of Asia Minor at a time and a vital Roman ally.Pontus (Seleucid/Persian). Strong kingdom that even managed to invade roman-owned Greece with huge forces.Armenia (Persian). Broke free from the Seleucids and even conquered grounds up to Antioch (the Seleucid capital) for a brief period and also fought wars against the Romans and Parthians.Achaean and Aetolian Leagues. (Greek) The biggest powers in post-Alexandrian Greece besides Macedon. Fought many wars with changing alliances and rivalries between the two of them and Macedon, Sparta, Rome, Epirus, invading Celts, Seleucids and others.Galatia (Gauls). Migrant Celtic state in central Asia Minor. Often fought as mercenaries or raided/fought against other states around them. One of the last local powers to be subjugated by the Romans.Judea (Seleucid?). In the last two centuries BC they were often independent and fighting against the Seleucids to maintain that independence.Crete/Rhodes/Cyrene/Thessaly/Tarentum/Massilia/Bythinia etc. (Greek) Important states, though it might be an overkill with so many Greeks already.If it is to be implemented, I would eagerly help make (in cooperation with someone or even by myself) the roosters for them. I'd only need to know how many buildings and troop types for each mini-faction and which ones of them should be done. Edit, Thought of a template. At question marks, I'm not sure if mini-factions should get that unit/structure or be simpler than that. INFANTRY (some might not apply to every civ - each one will have the design document details, deleted here to save space) SpearmanSwordsmanSkirmisherArcherSlingerCAVALRY SpearmanSwordsmanArcherSkirmisherSUPPORT UNITS Female CitizenPriest (?)Trader (?)NAVY (?) Fishing BoatMerchant ShipLight WarshipMedium WarshipSIEGE UNITS (?) RamStone ThrowerBolt ThrowerCHAMPION UNITS (Only one, trained at barracks at city phase, if they phase up?) ChampionHEROES (None?) CIV CENTRE UNITS (deppends on mini-civ) FORBIDDEN CLASSES (deppends on mini-civ) STRUCTURE DESCRIPTIONS VILLAGE House (?)Farmstead (?)Field (?)Corral (?)Storehouse (?)Outpost (?)Palisade (?)Dock (?)BarracksTOWN Civic CentreTemple (?)Blacksmith (?)Market (?)Defense Tower (?)Wall/Wall Tower/Gate (?)CITY (none) SPECIAL STRUCTURES (none) WONDER (none) CIV BONUSES (none?) TEAM BONUS (none?) TECHNOLOGIES (deppends on mini-civ) SPECIAL TECHNOLOGIES (none?)

Nope it's not a loading issue and my internet is pretty fast. And happens only on this site, only with threads. Not that annoying for me and the issue could be on my side, just saying in case it was a general issue.

This could be done as well. Or even limiting the bonus to one of the opponents' units. Might require extra coding though, so I'd suggest balancing it along the lines of my previous post. Some interesting examples of this practice (by the Romans) and it's effectiveness in history: Battle of Zama. Numidian King Masinissa, former ally of the Carthaginians, fought for the Romans, giving them the cavalry superiority for the first time against Hannibal.2nd Macedonian War. The Aetolian forces gave a fierce fight against the Macedonians during the Battle of Cynoscephalae. Numidian elephants routed the Macedonian left before it could take positions, leading to the Roman victory.Roman-Syrian War. The Pergamene and Rhodian fleets played the most decisive role in defeating the Seleucid ones for the Romans (and themselves as well, although it eventually led to Roman expansion eastwards and their absorption in the Roman realm, similarly to the fate of most Roman allies). At the decisive battle of Magnesia, the Pergamene right flank of the Roman army was the one that decided the outcome. While the roman left was routed by Antiochus' cavalry charge and combat in the middle was indecisive, the Pergamenes panicked the Seleucid scythed chariots who in turn fell upon the rest of the opposing Seleucid forces causing disorder. They then charged and eventually surrounded the Seleucid pikemen and elephants in the middle, as Antiochus failed to return and support them, trying to capture the roman camp. The Macedonians, recently defeated by the Romans in the 2nd Macedonian War, also fought for the Romans during this war, either cause they were forced to do so or to prevent Seleucid intervention in Greece.3rd Macedonian War. Greek forces and most notably Thessalian Cavalry fought for the Romans in the battle of Callinicus. At Pydna there are again Greek forces and Numidian elephants fighting for the Romans.War Against Nabis. Romans and Achaeans fought together against the last ruler of an independent Sparta.Battle of Corinth. Pergamenes (and Cretan mercenaries) fought for the Romans against the Achaeans.The Gallic Wars. Caesar took advantage of the unstable situation with wars between the various tribes and also employed Gallic auxiliaries in his forces.Battle of the Nile. Caesar took part in Ptolemaic civil wars, eventually leading to roman occupation of the Ptolemaic Kingdom.

Windows 7 and Firefox it is.

As said in the tile. Is it an issue of mine, that happens only in this forum or a general one?