Prodigal Son

- That's mercenaries, not divide and conquer. It could work in the other way I described if not embassies, or a completely new way. - You might be right, it seems fairly simple to me but I have no coding knowledge. - They wouldn't be extremely overpowered. They would get the civs most common types of only citizen soldiers, not champions. Let's say 3 (could be 2 or 4, but I'm settling for 1 each, infantry, cavalry, missile). So we have (proposed units could change ofc, deppenting on how powerful we want to make the bonus) Against Greek/Successor factions: 1) Hoplites - no big bonus, they have Triarii 2) Peltasts - same, they have Velites 3) Prodromoi - same, they have JavCav Against Persians 1) Sparabara - no big bonus, they have Triarii 2) Archers - new unit for them 3) Median Cav? - they have JavCav Against Britons/Gauls 1) Spearmen - no big bonus, they have Triarii 2) Slingers - new unit for them 3) Jav Cav? - they have JavCav And goes on... it's easily doable in a way that they get from zero to very few new unit types. Making it a variable offer of slightly stronger or weaker (but cheaper) troops of existing types with a possible addition of a few new ones if we want to.

I propose it as a general feature, meaning it's for every mode. Everything's up to the team though anyway:) This wouldn't be for all civs, only for the Romans. And it's not based on the map (and minifactions set to it), but on the opponent you face. Let's say you play the Romans, and I play the Athenians. You will be able to train some Hoplites, Peltasts and Prodromoi, representing the army of other Greek Cities who hated Athens and sided with the Romans, or ones who did so by superior Roman diplomacy. Now, if I play the Persians for the next match, and you are still the Romans, you will be able to train Persian extra units instead of Greek. If at a third match another person joins in my team, and he takes the Athenians while I still have the Persians, you will be able to train both Greek and Persian units. It wouldn't need much work, just already existing units and maybe some minor coding.

I've read about mini factions etc, that's something different though.

I came up with an idea for the Romans, making them able to train units depending on the civs of their rivals in game. Say they face a Greek faction, they would get access to a (probably limited) number of different Greek units. They face Greeks and Persians, they get both Greek and Persian units. It could work either as a tech unlocking those units at some existing building, or as an "embassy" building. If it works with embassy, then possibly the Carthaginian embassies could be renamed/changed to something like "Mercenary Camps". It could replace their ability to convert with money if it's too much of a bonus making them overpowered, and to me it makes more sense than it, training/hiring allies instead of bribing in combat. And it's far more interesting. Historically, using a faction's neighbors, usually of the same cultural group, against them, was a common practice, fueled by local rivalries or promises, the neighbors would often ally with an external power. The Romans were the ones who made by far the most of it though, and I can't imagine them conquering a unified Greece or Gaul without it, so I'm proposing it as a Roman Civ bonus.

I think this is the best solution, somewhat like the soldier/structure double names. It will make the game more accessible to people without "deep" historical knowledge.

I've composed two soundtrack songs for it, and while it's my first effort outside of punk and rock music they didn't turn out that bad. If anyone is interested or willing to give feedback they are attached to the post. Once authorized by Moddb moderators, a little blog post with some extra info on them will appear here. Music.zip

Well thought Rodmar:) If I may add one thing, maybe champions don't grant slaves, simulating elite troops fighting to death which was quite often. Then again the opposite was quite often too, with nobles fleeing or surrendering at times even without a fight. So not sure, maybe what serves gameplay the best.

Yes, it depends on what you call Scythians and I think sources have a variety on this. My Scythians are somewhat generic steppe people (excluding Mongols and Huns), since Warcraft style and model limitations won't allow for accurate details anyway. The cataphract was probably introduced to the Eastern and Hellenistic armies as an influence from the various steppe people well before AD though. Even in 480 BC at the battle of Plataea the Persians had at least some fully armored mounted officer(s), so it's highly possible that steppe tribes had heavily armored cavalry even earlier.

Any thoughts from the team on if this is feasible?

It's not just "click to enter chosen formation", it's extra options = extra time consuming thoughts/actions, add to that morale with retreating, reorganizing, etc. Nice ones, but it might be an overkill in a game that also features real-time economy. I could be wrong though, and hope so because I like them. However as I said it would be a dream game for me as well if it had two modes (let's rephrase them better): A Risk - Medieval Total War campaign map mode. This would feature fixed region movement (think a modernized version of this). Economy, research and troop movements will be done on the turn based campaign map and the battles on real time. The battles could use extra features like your suggestions (morale, advanced formations etc), directional damage bonuses, even stamina going down with time and reducing effectiveness, total war style. Those battles could also also work in a separate mode that would allow for recreation of historical battles. Units could be recruited directly on bigger squads.The current RTS mode, where some of the advanced combat features can be disabled (by default or by choice, depending on how micro intense we want it to be).And we'll have the best strategy game ever. Best features from both RTS and TBS, extreme modability and the most interesting (imo) era. Now a question to the team. Shouldn't this campaign map style be easier to be implemented than the "campaign proof of context" or something map? And according to my experience from total war and other TBS games fixed region movement works wonders for the AI, I miss it in newer games. So my suggestion is, if/when a campaign is implemented, make it this way. It will also save the time that would be spent on a story driven narrative and provide more replayability and faction availability in a sandbox, which could also have various eras/settings or quite easily be modded to be so.

Probably healing makes more sense than "luck". The concept of changing luck isn't something rational, while one could learn the era's medicine and mending techniques and priests should have been more educated (on average) than commoners back then. Courage could work though, maybe some attack speed aura with a tech or not. Actually just thought of a pair tech: - "Battlefield Priests/Augurs/Haruspices/Omen Readers", gives an attack speed increasing (or damage if attack speed change isn't implemented) aura to priests. - "Ritual Sacrifice/Fanatisism/Afterlife" or whatever it turns out to be called, gives a smaller but permanent bonus to all organic units.

Great ideas Rodmar, some might bring too much micro depending on their implementation though. But I'd love to see them if they can work. This coupled with a campaign mode with a risk/medieval (the first) total war map and building/economy in the campaign/turn based phase could make the ultimate strategy game. As it would also have the RTS mode. This part could also bring the interesting option of choosing to level your basic unit when you believe a local battle will be easy won. Also, the player could be allowed to select a conservative/risky grouping mechanic ; I mean, either spare the veteran (like in the Roman legion) or put them in first line to shorten the fight.

Looks great! I like the old one as well though, wouldn't be able to choose one easily.

They keep getting better and better:) The only thing I don't love about them is the metal texture on the armored one. Might have nothing to do with it's quality, just overall seems a tiny bit off with most of the game graphics (just as the Persian Ram - just had a flash about it). Maybe the way it flows unnaturally as the elephant moves adds to it as well. A chain/scale mail would look more natural, no clue on if it was used on Mauryan elephants though. On another, not important at all, note, maybe the armored ones could be slightly bigger? It would make sense to me if they chose the bigger/stronger animals to carry the extra weight.

My tech-tree for a Scythian Civ for inspiration (I use it for a Warcraft 3 ancient RTS map, so a few things won't fit for 0 A.D. and some other can't be as detailed as I'd wish) The Scythians field powerful cavalry and archers. They have the weakest and faster to build structures, which also can pack on horseback and redeploy. UNITS INFANTRYScythian Axeman (swordsman alternative)Scythian Skirmisher (can hide during the night)Scythian ArcherScythian Bosphoran Hoplite (bonus versus cavalry, unlockable)CAVALRYScythian Light Cavalry (cavalry skirmisher)Scythian Lancer (heavy cavalry)Scythian Cataphract (heavy cavalry, has command aura - champion unit)Scythian Horse ArcherSUPPORT UNITSScythian VillagerScythian Pack HorseSIEGEScythian Bosphoran Ballista (unlockable)STRUCTURESCiv CenterTrains: Scythian Villager, Scythian Pack HorseTechs: Town Phase (2 tiers, phase up), Loom (Villager, hit points), Steppe Hardiness (Organic units, regeneration, Scythians only), Urbanization (Structures, hit point and armor, disables the pack ability and allows the recruitment of hoplites and ballistas, Scythians only)Other: New ones can only be upgraded from colonies, which are only buildable on capturable settlements. Garrison Workers. Adds 100 population. Cannot move unlike other Scythian structures.Watch TowerTechs: Guard Tower (Watch Tower, enables attack/hit points), Carrier Pigeons (tower, line of sight), Town Watch (2 tiers, structure, line of sight)Other: Detects hidden units.Storehouse Techs: Improved Mining (3 tiers), Improved Lumber Harvesting (3 tiers), Improved Construction (3 tiers), Handcart (2 tiers, Villager speed)Other: Lumber dropsitBarracksTrains: Scythian Axeman, Scythian Skirmisher, Scythian Bosphoran HopliteTechs: Defensive/Guerrilla/Offensive Core Infantry (choice tech)Archery RangeTrains: Scythian Archer, Scythian Bosphoran BallistaTechs: Marksmanship (Archer damage), Fire Arrows (Archer/Structure/Ship extra damage vs Structures/Ships/Siege), Composite Bow (Archer, range)ForgeTechs: Weapon Forging (3 tiers, melee damage), Missile Forging (3 tiers, ranged damage), Armorcrafting (3 tiers, heavyarmor), Leatherworking (3 tiers, light armor), Footwear (infantry speed)MarketTechs: Coinage (periodic income per ally) Other: Exchange ResourcesStablesTrains: Scythian Horse Archer, Scythian Lancer, Scythian Light Cavalry, Scythian CatafractTechs: Envenomed Arrows (Horse Archer, damage over time, Scythians only), Full Scalemail (Cataphract, armor but reduced speed, Scythians only), Heavy/Swift Horses (choice tech, hit points or speed)CIV SPECIALSNo capturing or importing of horses needed to build Stables.Arrow firing units and structures have +200 range (under consideration, might keep this as a default bonus or give them the Composite Bow tech)Pack Horses build most of the structures and those structures can pack back on horseback to be redeployed as any structure among those.Packable Buildings have short build times (the pack horse trains slower than villagers though balance it) but also have about 50% less hit points. Packable Buildings are free (besides the pack horse cost)No farms. 100 food supply provided with each Civ Center.Urbanization strengthens Scythian buildings and allows the training of some extra units, but disables the ability to pack back structures.OVERVIEWInfantry: Weak. Average late game.Missile units: Strong. Most techs.Cavalry: Excellent. All troop types (besides Elephants), Many techs and easy access.Siege: Weak. Average late game.Economy: Above Average. Easy population management and fast-built redeployable structures.Structures: Weak. Almost average late gameNavy: No special techs for hired ships. Extra range due to Composite Bows.Format shamelessly stolen from the design document of the free indie RTS 0 A.D. Both for it's usefulness and as a chance to promote it.

Talking about champion units, not heroes here:)

Could do as a simplified version, but I like my proposal more as both balancable and reflecting historical roosters and changes in them.

My most recent favorites: New Boysetsfire http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iclvmA_RWfw&list=PLarRXRdKB3_CFsHi9U-9IpCpYvQTh3JWV Russ Rankin (Acoustic, here, he's the singer for Good Riddance) No Use For A Name (been checking them since the singer passed away recently and many of my favorite musicians mentioned it) I'm in a "soft music" mood compared to my average.

I think that's against the general direction the game has gone so far. If it turns out to be used, I've got several extra ideas that could enhance it.

I've made a moddb profile and started adding some info and screenshots. Edit: Tech trees for the first four factions added.

Thanks for the interest:) The map being playable again is just a matter of a few hours work. It only comes down to when I'll have the will. Screenshots won't be really impressive since most unit models are like "closest possible" rather than historically accurate, but I can post some I guess. That reason is why I look for a WC3 skinner and/or modeler. A few small changes will improve the game visuals a lot.

I wouldn't be so sure. Many sources we have are weak and many others are lost. I'm in noway claiming that they certainly used them, but since some sources say they were used for display of power and others that they were actually used in combat, it could be true and even be more common than that. You seem a little overly eager to act like an absolute expert on this which you don't seem to be (unless the language barrier doesn't let me see it someway). Also (3), that would prevent them from using infantry as well since it's slower than elephants (I know they mostly focused on cavalry, don't get me wrong). And a mixed review doesn't always mean much. Anyway we're just making suggestions for a (possible) future addon, and the team will deside. And you probably know more on Parthians than me, I'm just saying don't eagerly take something for granted cause it seems this way, especially when there are some serious doubts. Edit: I think the most valid point for including them, even if the sources don't prove common or even certain use, is gameplay. The Parthians will lack troop variety compared to most other factions. Edit 2: The Europa Barbarorum team on RTW modding, known for their insanely good research, give the Parthians Elephants.

I can't speak of evidence, just a part of a book I found online. But, your argument doesn't mean much. Lack of availability and military reforms happened all the time. Epirus had war elephants only for a couple decades or so, yet they ended up as it's more iconic unit because the campaigns they were used in were well documented. If that Parthian campaign was as well documented, no doubt we'd be speaking a lot about parthian war elephants nowadays (provided that all this isn't made up or mistake by the author, which I doubt but can't be sure).

I partly disagree, but let's not drag this off-topic:)

Yeah when I saw your reply I was ready to say something like "I don't want to distract one of the major contributors from 0 AD to my project, I prefer to see 0 AD finished anyway, even if I see it selfishly it will allow for better ancient era mapmaking:)". So this mostly goes to people here familiar with Warcraft III but not contributing to 0AD, unless someone becomes totally interested in my project which I doubt. The map has 8 planed Civs, some of which might change (each of them has several unique mechanics and bonuses, which I'm not describing now to avoid length). Mostly done: -Romans -Celts -Scythians -Macedonians (which can become Antigonids, Seleucids or Ptolemaics with a city phase choice) To be done: -Carthaginians -Spartans -Athenians (might merge with the previous in Greeks or something) -Persians (might become Pathians if I deside to settle for only hellenistic age) -Other civs are considered as well The core gameplay is mostly influenced by Age of Empires (and 0AD with paired techs and other details). Some differences include: -Soldiers rank up to rank 5 (each rank increases their evasion and critical strike chance) -Towns are built on fixed settlements, somewhat Age of Mythology like -There are 2 gatherable resources, Gold and Lumber (an annoying WCIII limmit) -Most factions require to capture elephants or horses in the wild, or import them at the market in order to build stables. -Similarly, herdables can be captured or trained at the farm. These increase the pop cap and are slightly cheaper than farms in doing so, but they will require some extra micro and protection. -WCIII naval system is limmited, but I've come up with a working solution. You can capture "Greek Colonies" along the shore, train ships there and use them to capture fishing regions (which increase your pop cap) and sea trade routes, which grant gold income. -At fixed locations across the map, randomized mercenary camps appear, changing the options available for each game. I'm also thinking to add structure "resources" as well at those slots, which will be required to be held in order to research top tier upgrades (like iron for top tier weaponforging). There's much more, that's just some things on top of my head. I've posted many of the techs and other ideas I use in the technologies part of the forum as suggestions for 0AD.