illyrian

I keep on playing this game every time i get a chance to, and i think since the years it was started there has been great progress. Is there anyway there could be a thread in our forums that would give us fans a little information on what to expect on the next installment. We would really appreciate it, and it makes the wait much easier. Thank you Ps: I can't believe it has been already 6 years since i signed up here...

Sign me up Migert Baburi age 24 US of America, yeah baby

Guys we are very proud of your progress and work, but we all want to play the game and what i personally have seen has been very good.

i signed up for computer programming at school hopefully that will help

hey i would be interested in this project. I can help with historical research of the balkans, since i am very knowledgeable with at least the descendants of illyrians. I'd like to get some skills in modelling as well as texturing, and i have no problem starting from scratch. lol.

One note paal, from a history major, me, to historian, you. I would say that the best unit hand to hand combat should stay the caestrati, but in formation it should be the spartan homoioi. They were equipped with the smallest swords in the greek world to make it easier for them to stab their opponent when too close to use spear. They used those swords so effectively, that no army has ever defeated the spartans in battle. THeir only defeats have come as a result of tactical superiority of certain generals, like pelopida and Epaminonda. A legionary wouldn't stand a chance in front of a Spartan Homoioi wheather in distance or close combat. I do agree with you on the use of hellenic hoplon. Was not built for fencing but great protection nonetheless.

army formations for all the civs, carthagenians, romans, iberians, gauls, germans, i said phalanx already, can't wait for roman legions, cav formations etc..... ahhhh my mouth is watering just thinking about them, lol

i want to see a showcase of the greek phalanx, and its abilities.

Carrhae was a dissaster because there was no roman experience to surena's way of war. THe 10000 of surena's horsemen were never defeated because they were what no Eastern army had ever done, adapt and use the terrain to its fullest. Hit and run, and then muscle the separated portions of an army. surena's cav was a professional army never seen again in the era. Crassus was never prepared for that kind of warfare. What are you gonna do with 1300 celtic cav, against 9000 horsearchers, and 1000 cataphractoi. the horse archers were using shield piercing arrows, as they were able to pierce roman shields together with limbs. As far as the best infantry, romans would be up there, but i think that the iberians were better overall. What made the romans so good was the weaponry that they used together with the swordmanship. The pila would take away the shield of the enemy, leaving him helpless against a roman swordman. The iberian saunion, could be reused by the enemy as it was made completely of iron and was quite robust. At cannae, the iberians and gauls, held the hastati, and principes firm for the necessary time for Hannibal's african infantry to flank them on the side, and destroy them. Lets not forget that Hannibal was vastly outnumbered by the 80000 men of the consular legions. Tactically, the legions should be better, by employing testudo, building forts, and having better morale, but the superiority in swordmanship should stay the lighter iberian units like devotio, or caestrati, maybe scutari, as i see scutari as a response to the roman legionary. I think that the iberian caestrati together with the numidians were the ones that gave rome the defeat lake tresemene, throught the ambush set by hannibal.

In a more subtle way you mean that there is going to be an expansion including all the mediterranean civs in their glory????? If it is so, i will raise my glass and wish 0 A.D a quick development. lol.

i haven't seen any answers except paal, and i thank him for that, but seeing the lattest "screenshot" has made me weep from joy. THey have gotten the syntagma right. No game has given them the right animation. My only remark would be the longer sarissa. the other thing i noticed is that the hellenes will be missing the sarissophoroi, the macedonians answer to light cavalry. the two handed sarissa yielding light cavalry. The work is just amazing, so keep up the good work, gents.

exactly what the topic says. Are the units going to get veterancy from basic to super units from battles won, or are they going to be upgraded through a tech tree???

LOL, can't say that everything i suggested will be incorporated, but my experience as a rts fanatic has told me to be more sceptical, and more analytic of ai behavior. I know for a fact that CA is trying to do this in M2 TW because of community dissatisfaction with ai in rtw and BI. Just wondering what are ai capabilities going to be. Example: Are the romans going to use their formations or are they going to attack like a trickle, as AOE ai does, sending armies one soldier at a time...

Separation of macedonia and Greece, Egypt, scythia, in addition to Illyrians, thracians, and germania

how are you doing Zeusthor. To tell you the truth i was going to give up since no one was answering the posts. I was thinking to have the alliances last for a certain amount of time. If you create an alliance through a particular hero, the ai and player can make that alliance last until hero's death, or a certain amount of time, like 5 years, or 5 seasons, during which time the ai can remember how many times player has shown loyalty to it. How many times player answered ai call in time of need, and to have that ai keep alliance with player instead of other ai, if player has shown more loyalty to ai, than other ai, in case of war between player and that third ai. I think i made the last one a little confusing, sorry, lol. Just couldn't stop the train of thought.... What do you fellas think???????? Possible????

You fellas are really talented, and what i have seen here in this forum is an example of just that. I come here everyday to check these posts because as A.K has pointed out, this project has the potential that Ensemble Studios did not realise Rise of rome had, or chose not see. I have no other motives but to help with whatever expertise i have, which are limited, and believe me, i am willing to do everything in my power to help make this game the revolutionary game that it seems to have potential to be. If you guys don't want to give out all the secrets in the game, then i suggest that you post vids where the community can comment on the different aspects of the game. I just finished playing the demo or Rise and Fall and to tell you the truth there are so many things that i would want to tell the devs because it really handicapped the whole experience. Since this game is going to be a freeware, let us help you with bug reports or any information that would better the game experience. A predictable ai that doesn't realise the strengths and weaknesses of the surroundings, its just worthless, and the demo of Rise and Fall was just that. Don't want to see this project as one of those disappointments. I think A.K is on to something, personally. As far as mount and Blade is concerned, the developers have put in castles from one of the modders who put them in his own mod, you can also siege two castles in the game, and now the armies can be put into formation, infantry, archers, cav, and you can give orders to each separately. They are doing very well, and adding even more effects. If you play the game, you will see many changes from the original form. All because of the community which very much involved in the development of the game.

Hey I posted this somewhere else, but since this is the place for ai wishlist, here it is mine, Diplomacy should play a crucial role in making allies and enemies. I haven't seen a game in which the AI would ask help from an enemy to fight another enemy with the newly found ally. I think that would make for a better gameplay, and also it would be historically correct, as Thebes and athens although enemies became allies in the battle of chaeronea, or the persian wars. I see that as a must. It would be really cool and very attractive to any gamer who really loves rts games like aoe, or TW series. They all miss that ingredient. Civ 3-4 has that incorporated beautifully. It would look great to see two armies act in unison, against an aggressor. This would reinforce the theory of buffer states, giving it depth My theory is that the hero with the most abilities (higher level) would take over command for both armies, althought 2 heros can fight and contribute separately to the army with their own strength. He higher level hero would use his culture's formations and also using the strength of his ally's army. Example:hannibal used carthaginian army in the greek fashion, head on in phalanx formation. But he used the Iberians and numidians as ambushing force, because that was their way of fighting in their homeland. I hope you can catch my flow here. how about that diplomacy issue with the ai. Two enemies acting as allies against a stronger but common enemy. i think it needs scripting, and I DON'T know much about scripting or developing. THese are just ideas that come to mind, and i would like some feedback from anyone who believes that it is worth it. banana.gif

I definitely understand what A.K is saying, and i am sorry but i kinda agree. Mount and Blade is doing the same thing. There were only 2 developers, husband and wife, and now they are like you guys, about ten... they allowed the community to actually play their game really early in its development stage and write suggestions on their discussion forum. i know i came up with their idea of one handed/two handed sword yelding, and they incorporated it. I had a whole community discuss that topic, and if you play mount and blade, you will see many features which i myself, and many other community members have helped incorporate in the game. I am very proud of that, and i still play that game. I write in your forums because i love the classical era more than any other one. And i have not seen one game that truly portrays it. I hope i am not off topic but i don't know where to post this.

Hey paal, how about that diplomacy issue i was trying to address. Two enemies acting as allies against a stronger but common enemy. Civ 3-4 has that incorporated beautifully. It would look great to see two armies act in unison, against an aggressor. This would reinforce the theory of buffer states, giving it depth My theory is that the hero with the most abilities (higher level) would take over command for both armies, althought 2 heros can fight and contribute separately to the army with their own strength. He higher level hero would use his culture's formations and also using the strength of his ally's army. Example:hannibal used carthaginian army in the greek fashion, head on in phalanx formation. But he used the Iberians and numidians as ambushing force, because that was their way of fighting in their homeland. I hope you can catch my flow here. It would be GREAT to have more people and developers discuss this idea as i don't think that it needs new civs as much as it needs scripting, and I DON'T know much about scripting or developing. Roman army should have the ability i think of constructing forts, and i don't mean the villagers, but the soldiers themselves. THese are just ideas that come to mind, and i would like some feedback from anyone who believes that it is worth it.

history, philosophy, my compadre lol:)

i guess some of you can figure me out since it comes from my nick, and my folks are not represented on the poll, its a shame i tell ya, its a shame... My mother is a viking, my father is a turkoman, i don't really know,

Thanks Paal for the answer. Another question. Why did you guys choose to make macedonia, and greeks together since they were not both of the same stock of people. The macedones were considered pan hellenic. Lets not forget that illyrians were kicking macedon butt long before philip, and their way of fighting was very distinct from the hellenes.i was just reading a book on history of the balkans. Being myself from the region, i would say that it is the biggest question in my mind. If the two nations would have been left separate, i believe the game would be a little more interesting. I personally would love to see theban sacred band, the Argives, Spartans, Phocians, Athenians, Corinthians, etc united against the macedonians. That would really be better in my opinion. Making little cities around the mediterranean regions autonomous, fighting for freedom. Epirus, Illyrians, thracians, Dacians, thessalians, all with their respective units, examples peltasts, illyrian cavalry, axemen, thracian horsemen, peltasts, etc, thessalians had the great cavalry... Diplomacy would then play a crucial role in making allies and enemies. I haven't seen a game in which the AI would ask help from an enemy to fight another enemy with the newly found ally. I think that would make for a better gameplay, and also it would be historically correct, as Thebes and athens although enemies became allies in the battle of chaeronea, or the persian wars. I see that as a must. It would be really cool and very attractive to any gamer who really loves rts games like aoe, or TW series. They all miss that ingredient. WHat do you think Folks??? It's too much i think for the dev team, but a gamer can dream

sorry fellas but i am a big history freak, part of my major. not trying to show off, just want to help. it's nice to know that developers listen to the community.

roman units i think should include hastatus-heavy infantry, no chainmail, pila and gladius princeps-heavy infantry with chainmail, armed with pilum and gladius, better than hastatus triarius-spearmen-veteran, heaviest infantry armed with hasta and gladius funditores-slingers rorari-skimisher- youngest members of roman army Velites- like the rorari, lol, skimishers sorry i had forgotten about them. lol italian cavalry- romans did not have their own cavalry, their strength was their hardy infantry, their relied on their allies to supply cavalry, samnites, lucanians, etruscans, gauls, germans. cavalry should be divided into skirmishing cavalry, and heavy cavalry armed with a long spear, overhand. thats as much as i can say for romans, Their allies, italians, were more greek in their warmaking, comprising of phalanx formations, heavy infantry like romans, axemen, good skirmishers, funditores, and sagittarii Good enough????????????

I really enjoy the concept of the game but i have somethings i want to discuss as to what i saw in the screenshots. First, sarissas were too short, for the macedonian phalangites. THe sarissa was 15-18 feet long, about two and a half to three times longer than the soldier that carried it. the average man during that time would not surpass 5'6". The first 5 rows had their pikes leveled creating a screen of pikes. Pikemen should have a boost if fighting in level ground. And a syntagma was comprised of 256 pikemen, or 16x16. THe macedonian phalanx were never beaten in any conflict with the romans, in a ground level battle. Generals' miscalculations have been the reasons for macedonian losses against mobile forces like romans. The picture shows the phalangites formation too open. it has to be more closed, when deployed in battle there was about .9m space between the men. Make the units a little more compact. Another is phalanx formation for the greeks. I didn't see overhand spear hold. Phalanx depth should be used as an advantage, giving the deeper phalanx a certain attack boost, or formation breaking ability. References, theban 50 deep phalanx against spartans at mantinea and leuctra. Barbarians-triangle formations for infantry and cavalry, and give some infantry speed boost, as many infantry in barbarian armies comprised cavalry contigents. Tacitus in his thesis on Germania, is the perfect source. Romans should have testudo, and pilum. pilum should be thrown before hand to hand. If there is any stamina with units, pilum would need the full stamina of the unit to be used. I don't know what the team has in store in connection with walls, and siege towers, and in my opinion they should be incorporated. Please anyone if they noticed anything from the screenies please post it. Hopefully it will help the developing team