Mythos_Ruler

[citation needed]

If this is true, then our entire Design Document should be riddled with Wikipedia citations.

I think the proportions on the right example are off. The proportions on Amish's example are better (except for the door heights; the same problem occurs on the Civ Centre).

The information we use from Wikipedia is just facts, not ideas. Original analysis is heavily frowned upon (usually challenged and deleted) on Wikipedia. The wording of those facts is indeed original, but if we simply restate those facts from Wikipedia with different wording, I don't see how we have to attribute Wikipedia at all.

Pretty cool vid, Ludo.

The worker elephants also assist in constructing buildings.

Yep, Amish's example is a better layout. I'd even add another leg for a U shape, with a wall in front and entrance. Another thing is I should point out, only the larger buildings should be stone. All other smaller buildings, like houses and mill and farmstead and such should be the wooden/white plaster look. As far as shields go, a full set of shields for units need to be modeled and textured first before folks start adding shields as props to buildings.

I'd be happy to help paraphrase the information if Spahbod doesn't have the time. Or... We can just give Wikipedia the proper citation. Isn't that just as well? Though, some of the info in the map scripts is rather longish, so a rephrasing may be better anyway.

On one hand, I support free modding teams to create what they will, but then on the other hand I support the copyright holders of Tolkein's works to be able to protect their IP. As a writer and content creator myself, I'd personally like to have the right to protect my IP when I see fit to do so.But I do feel like IP and copyright law has gotten seriously out of hand. Copyrights in the 'States used to only last 14 years, then later it was extended to the lifetime of the creator, then lifetime of the creator+50 years, and now today it lasts for 125 years retroactively. I find this completely insane, hurts a free and open society and works to stifle innovation. But as long as this is the law, the Tolkein Estate and other stakeholders have a right to assert their copyright (or not assert their copyright, as they see fit). "Merp" and TLA are pretty much doomed. (the extent of software patents is another insanity that must be remedied too, but there are far too many powerful stakeholders to easily fix)

yeah, I could see varieties like: Conqueror, Defender, Rusher, etc. Civs will prefer specific strategies based on their style of play, but occasionally will choose different strategies than what they prefer, perhaps as an algorithm based on the map type with some minor randomness thrown in. By default the player would not know what strategy the AI has chosen, but it could be possible to allow the player to override the default randomness and choose a strategy for the AI in the game host screen.

Indeed. Selling 0 A.D. even at this stage in an honest and open way is perfectly okay. People choose buy incomplete software all the time, especially when they know that it helps further development. Look at what Wolfire Games has been doing with Overgrowth. The key words here are open and honest. Folks know they are getting something incomplete. What some folks seem to be selling on Ebay is not open and honest--they grossly misrepresent the product. This we want to attempt to prevent when we can, but our hands are somewhat tied in this area. All we can do is try to be as informative as possible to the fans and hope no one is duped by a 3rd party.

It's probably the large boat obstructions screwing with the pathfinder, which was created for little soldiers marching in boxes. Ship movement was discussed yesterday on IRC. No real conclusions were reached, but some consensus is slowly forming.

There's probably a way that we could make walls prevent ranged units from attacking across their obstruction footprints, but for simplicity's sake it would only apply to walls and not other buildings. Also, it probably would not be physics-based or trajectory-based or anything like that, but simply calculating the target angle and determining if it crosses the wall's obstruction footprint and then preventing the attack command from occurring. Not sure if all that is right. Perhaps a programmer with better knowledge could chime in and correct me. Another consideration is pathfinding for the ranged units that can "see" the enemy units on the other side of the wall, but cannot fire at them because of the wall obstruction. Do these units try to walk around the wall or what? Something to ponder (and I'm sure this has all been discussed before).

Not a huge fan of the box art. I would try using better artwork and screenshots for the cover art. What about the main menu background graphics?

Indeed. It would be good to have the ability to set a civ's default pop cap either in the civ json or via technologies (as quantumstate has suggested, which isn't a bad idea either, as then you could have techs to increase the caps). They would be a multiplier in order to be compatible with whatever max pop the host sets, so a 1.1 (+10% pop cap) for Mauryans and Persians and a 0.9 (-10% pop cap) for Spartans. Then, if the host sets max pop to 200, Mauryan and Persian pop caps would be 220 and Spartans would be at 180. If the host sets max pop to 300, Mauryan and Persian pop caps would be 330 and Spartans would be at 270*.*Keep in mind that the Mauryans and Persians have lots of cannon fodder infantry and some high pop units such as elephants and chariots, so the difference in max pop is deceptive here. Spartan units are very powerful.

Not necessarily. How many civs did AOK's expansion pack add to AOK compared to the original list? How many civs did AOM's expack add to AOM? Right now, I can only really see adding these civs in Part 2: Imperial Romans (The "Five Good Emperors" era) Early Byzantines (roughly AD 500) Germans (perhaps split these into as many as 3 "Germanic" civs as we split the Hellenes into 3 "Hellenic" civs) Huns Sarmatians Parthians Dacians If we did 3 Germanic civs, then that would be a list of 9 factions. Not bad. I can't see adding the Guptas because they'd be extremely similar to the Mauryans (but maybe that's a selling point, as they'd be easier to add). Maybe add the Mayans though... They would add some nice variety.

Hmm... I was hoping for a layout more along the lines of the Persian or maybe Roman barracks. The back part needs to be the tallest for consistency.

"Special Buildings" are different from Wonders, per se. But if we add enough Wonders to Atlas, then we might think about adding some kind of "Wonder" mechanic to the game. But at this time, there's no real plan to add Wonders as a gameplay mechanic.

Can work.

Another thing I would like is to be able to set pop caps for each faction, probably as a multiplier of the pop cap chosen by the host. Probably do this in the civ jsons. E.g., Persians, Mauryans (and Bob's Han) could have 1.1 (a +10% pop cap), while the Spartans would have 0.9 (-10% pop cap).

Need ship references now. We have them spec'd to have the fishing boat, merchant ship, light warship, and medium warship.

Someone actually made a tower defense mod of the game and posted on the forums a year or so ago.

Should probably fade the edge of the red in the bottom quadrant. Other than that, looks pretty cool.

I wish we could produce that shimmering on demand for the metal mines.

It's the "animated textures on a static plane" thing we don't have yet.