Lion.Kanzen

Take this from an article I recently read. During the second century, the empire reached its apogee geographically (under the emperor Trajan) and economically (under Hadrian and the Antonines). Behind this success, however, there was cause for concern. Emperor Marcus Aurelius fought mightily against the barbarians on the frontiers. Books on history by Pausanias, Plutarch, Athenaeus and others reflected a general feeling that the old ways were better and that something had been lost in the new Roman era. Movements such as the Neo-Pythagoreans and the Christian Encratists adopted a negative view of the material world. The question of the origin of evil troubled many, especially Jews and Christians who believed in a good Creator. As a consequence, undercurrents began to push society towards another spiritual world. The cult of ancient religions. Neopythagoreanism It originated in the 1st century BC and flourished during the 1st and 2nd centuries AD. The Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition describes neopythagoreanism as "a link in the chain between the old and the new" within Hellenistic philosophy. Central to neopythagorean thought was the concept of a soul and its inherent desire for a unio mystica with the divine. In ancient times there was a lot of respect for ancestral cultures. Rome recognized the Jews as an ancient people, and while Christians were considered a branch of Judaism, they enjoyed some protection. But this situation was ambiguous, because there was popular animosity against the Jews, especially after the Jewish revolts against Rome (the last in the 130s during Hadrian's reign). But most Christians clung to their Jewish heritage. Partly because this showed that Christianity was not something new (a major pagan criticism against Christians), but had ancient historical roots, an important fact in a culture that valued the oldest as the best and truest. Jewish Christians maintained various aspects of Judaism along with their faith in Jesus as the Messiah. Gentile Christians, while not observing the ceremonial aspects of the Law, continued to regard the Jewish Tanak in its Greek translation as Scripture.

It also reminds me of something I read about Herodotus at one time.

I would change the scale a bit, embassy type, it depends on the map.

We will see how to adapt it as with the relics. How I said this is in the art forum. Over there I will open one for this gameplay in due time.

Me gusta mucho. I like that. I hate that maps in 500 BC are empty it's like the land without humans

By the way this is in the art forum, for now it is conceptual. We are discussing small things. How it looks like , aesthetic, They will be small sanctuaries and more beautiful than the one in AoE IV [Beta].

They might have different bonuses. It is a game mode, like Relic mode.

@Freagarach

Control the ruins - sacred placed [ Capture flag mode] Once all of the ruins are acquired by a certain team or faction, the countdown to victory starts (which is five minutes in the real world or more). If an opposing team or faction does not acquire a ruin within the time frame, the faction or team with all ruins wins the game. There will be a difference between both modes. Sacred mode You only need a priest to capture the sacred places. In Ruins mode, any unit can capture them.

I have a long time not to update my folder DE.

I want something smaller than a temple. something in nature. A small shrine, smaller than a monument.

https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/sacred-sites/173977/4 I think that is the idea that I liked the most about the design of AoE IV. " you capture them and if you keep all of them long enough you win". In AoE IV mechanic clear, the developers have explicitly said that one victory condition they've experimented with is sacred site victory where a player must control all sacred sites to win. At various points in the fan event footage you can see control of the sacred sites listed as a victory condition, and here you can see that controlling all sacred sites starts a ~5 minute timer. Weirdly in that shot there's only one sacred site to control. In this footage from the most recent event you can see that there's 3 sacred sites in the middle of the map shown -- their icon is a circle with a cross in the middle. The minimap isn't fully explored so there could be more. Its plausible that they have some additional purpose beyond being a victory condition but we don't have any hints of that being the case. In 0 A.D. in our game they could be places of natural as well as cultural worship.

You just have to take the main architectural and structural idea and make it small to proportion. Less columns, less galleries.

Yes please.

I'm talking about a decade, I'm not talking about so recent.(Trac) But yes, lately there is much more dynamics with the interface. I am not aware of what Lambart does, but it is full of exciting ideas.

I'm sure not. I made suggestion and searched for tickets related to this. Nobody takes the minimap seriously except for Nani. Btw I would like to have an extended version, called a tactical map with icons.

interesting idea. Historically it is impossible to have so many elephants. At least in proportion.

Like an attach building from StarCraft ?

the technologies are optional, it can even be balanced.

There should be an anti-cavalry technology that gives defense bonuses to the tower and walls.

I never use my identity.

they did something useful.

it would be nice to upload gameplay. To present the state of the mod.