Sighvatr

Shun the Nonbeliever!

Architecture depends on how early or late into the Seleucid Empire you guys want for Seleucids. I didn't read into much of the Seleucids, but I imagine they had a very similar system to the Ptolemaics.

Okay, well come back to it when you do have time to do programming and attempt to start it. I would like to see long range combat too. For example, infantry with standard assault rifles can shoot the distance from the bottom of your screen to the top, artillery can shell other players from across the map, and etcetera. Cover, line of fire, and line of sight should be a big factor. It would more appealing than watching 200-300 guys in a formation or blob shoot at each other from a couple of meters away.

Cool idea, can you do it? I would like to see a good cover system along with a combat system that rewards coordinated strategic and tactical play over mass quantity and quality of troops. Check out Lambda Wars, a half-life 2 RTS game to know what I mean.

Then to make up for the necessity of micro-management of siege weapons, make the siege weapons powerful enough to require the need of attention and slow the movement speed of units to allow players to micro-manage things in time.

You can always include an auto-garrison button for ground units to occupy siege units as well as assign a key function on the keyboard for it.

I guess.. If you take a look at some medieval sieges, and even the historical record of Julius Caesar siege of Alesia, people build their own fortification around the city or castle they want to invade. It can be a castle versus castle fight. Invaders would build wooden towers or ramps to place archers or catapults to fire into the besieged fortification and I believe that is what the Assyrians were doing.

Yeah, I knew you would appreciate it man.

Can always try to see how well it would work to occupy siege units in order to use them. That and I would like to scale the siege units larger.

This is really helpful! Thank you, Lion!

The Assyrian Battle Scenes The King in battle upon his chariot Assyrian soldiers besieging a city I think. Logistics people to the left Assyrian soldiers attacking from the right and they would build fortifications of their own to combat with the enemy like any proper siege combat would have. The spearmen in formation. I took a close shot to show the smaller details. Cavalry prisoners of war if I can remember. I took the picture because I have no idea what is on the prisoner's backs. Its hard to spot the detail in the picture, but these guys are wearing footgear, and do have a good amount of armour coverage compared to the guys in the lion hunt scene. The texture on the back of the shields are interesting too. Sorry I didn't take more pics, but my family did not have the patience to stand in the British Museum forever like I would, so I was in the mad dash to take as many pictures as I could for artistic purposes later. From the pictures, I believe people under estimate how much armour people did wear for war and not just your tunic and the occasional helmet in the Ancient and Classical Eras.

I returned back from a trip to England about two weeks ago. I was visiting the British Museum when I thought of the 0 A.D. peeps. Here is what I took of the Assyrian exhibit: I thought the body armour was interesting. The lamellar has a weird shape to it. I would not consider these guys to represent the military. This was part of the scene of the King's lion hunt. They were probably some kind of guard or extras participating in the lion hunt. I took a picture of this scene so you don't confuse them with the actual battle scenes. I forgot what the horses were for, but the workers to the far left were building a sort of arena for the king to immerse himself into and keep the lions in the vicinity if that is what I remember. Another lion hunt scene that is to the right of the picture displayed above. King's Lion Hunt Scene King during his lion hunt whom the archers in front of him are shooting lions displayed on the wall left of this image. Notice the king is not dressed for battle like he would be in the battle scenes,

Movies and video games are art because they display an image that trigger the emotions of the conceived. Art back then was used as propaganda to convince people to believe that something appears as a real factor or to describe a real situation. I know people do not question artwork describing the past, so I feel it is necessary to create in art what people should think of when they see a roman soldier or a viking warrior for example.

I would like to see a comparison in-game picture.

You need to understand the usage of the weapons, armour, tactics, and situation. For example, one of the Roman pilum's purpose is to burden and break shields; therefore, it would also mean its suitable to use against other infantry. People don't hack at each other until someone breaks, fighting is more of a thinking and speed situation with timing and endurance as constant factors. Kinetic energy alone should not be what decides the counters.

Accidental mobile phone double post.

0 A.D. does have a better grip on history than Age of Empires, but 0 A.D. still lacks plenty of relevance between each faction as each faction is borrowed from a different time period. That is another reason why Numidians could be added in easily.

I really don't like how distant the time periods are for the civilizations in 0 A.D. It doesn't make me feel any better to see the later periods of Rome mixed in with the earlier.

Pikemen really suck now. Should increase their movement speed to a realistic one. I really dislike the hard counters. I also miss seeing my units upgrade and the ability to purchase the tech to upgrade my units even more.

@Tau: I'm not sure if I understood your alternative method correctly. Can you rephrase it for me? @FeXor: When I play the current 0 A.D. version competitively, reaching the unit cap and producing units consistently is already a goal of mine. Though I would agree that some essential progressive techs would need to remain in price, but there are some techs in the blacksmith, fortress, temple, and other economic buildings whose techs are cheap to purchase and they do not particularly threat the economy if purchased. The current techs mentioned are not very risky in my opinion to purchase; therefore, I get the idea that buying technologies aren't a big impact, rather its just a due time till I max out all the techs I can purchase. The purpose of increasing the price of technology is not just a risk factor, but it may include the need for players to expand and gather more resources to then establish boundaries with their enemies to fight for the control of resources. A player doesn't particularly need to buy all the technologies available during his current phase. All a player needs to do is provide enough resources to construct the essential buildings and purchase the next phase for their city growth. I mean to propose that technologies need to feel like a choice of tools to use against an opponent rather than an alternative output of resources to fund into. @nietkb: Technology web could work if displayed correctly for people to understand what they will need to purchase next. I'm for slightly exaggerating the cost of most technology and providing more technology diversity.

Should provide a skin color variety to the Mediterranean factions. The only prejudice I've read so far of the Classical Era were those of nationalistic and religious reasons.

Haha, sorry Lion. I will in the future post my guesses of the Classical Era and present my research, but it currently lacks some strong clear support and I need to find the articles that I read to support it. I will say that it mostly has to do with how bronze were used back then and an estimate of how available the alloy was, whether iron equipment were used more in the classical era, and to argue against about whether certain groups of people were deprived of proper protective equipment. As you say, each person has their own view of the hellenistic timeperiod and I should shut myself up. Lol

Oh yeah, high risk and high reward sounds like a nice idea. For technology being tied to buildings- I was thinking that if the player loss the building, the player would be temporarily be denied of the technology purchased. If the structure tied to the technology purchased was rebuilt, the player would regain that technology. I was also considering an idea where the more duplicates of a structure built, the less expensive the price of a technology tied to those specific buildings are to purchase.

I'll look it up!

Errrr.. I meant reference. Thanks Stanis! Are your helmets in the game yet?