Jump to content

Sighvatr

Community Members
  • Posts

    426
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Posts posted by Sighvatr

  1. That's the point isn't it - RTS's are all about engaging in conflicts. The millions of dollars being poured into campaign advertising as we speak are testament to the fact that people can be converted and that there is value in doing so.

    I missed the fact that people can be manipulated by advertisement, I agree. I don't have another say against it, except that it tends to be a very big irritation in the game. But thats a personal issue.

  2. I strongly dislike units that have the ability to convert an opponent's troops. Its a little too sketchy when attempting to compare the ability to real life. You can't really convert an actual person unless they are willing to be converted, or been engaged in a conflict where they could lose something or somebody important.

    wololo.jpg

    • Like 1
  3. I don't really think there should be a hard mode, or an easy mode to play. I think it would make a bot more challenging, and fun, if they switch up their strategies or tactics.

    One bot can play defensively by building more walls than a usual bot. Such as constructing a lot of towers, and defensive structures to garrison troops in. An attack bot that plays very aggresively, will send in war parties every chance he gets while constructing a larger army. Another bot can become an expansionist, and attempt to expand his borders everywhere while maintaining his defensive force to protect the borders.

    Other than different playing styles, you can create AI to focus on building up a "pure" force of certain units, and upgrade everything for that specific unit/s, or create a variety of different troops to help counter attack certain units a player might use.

  4. I remember playing a settlers game when I was younger. Though that game did irritate me from time to time. The roads created by the settlers were reallly cool though. It is possible to include that in 0 A.D. but only somebody with that particular interest would create it. Notice how we are only getting nice looking rocks, because somebody wanted to make and put in nice rocks for example. So would you do us the honor of creating these roads yourself?

  5. Holy crap. I don't want to spend the extra time to click on my units to 'forage' or bring a food cart to battle. I just want to invade and be done with the match. There is only so much realism you can put into a strategy game similar to Age of Empires. Maybe if this game was a first person viewed, persistant world game, I would agree with you guys; but your suggesting to add in a lot of unexplained complexity to players whom will download this game, and wonder why their troops aren't doing so great. This just increases the amount of time it takes to kill off somebody, and that is already difficult.

  6. Well, if you have two romans in the same game, you can't give them the same color anyway.

    But I still like your Idea, Sighvtar

    I'm not saying that each civilization is it's own color. i'm just throwing an idea on what colors the palette should have. Thank you for the support!

    Tyrian purple may be interesting to see if we need a purple. I like whats going on here!

  7. I believe this would easily snuff out while in flight. Though, I am no expert!

    You may want to consult with these kids then. lol

    But I somewhat agree with you. It depends on the range it was fired, the location, altitude, weather, and wind. People use flaming arrows at night time in movies, because it makes a great cinematic shot.

  8. I forgot the fancy name to this, but you could use a piece of wood from a tree that is loaded with sap (like pine wood for instance). When you light it on fire, it burns for a very long time, and you dont need some other expensive ingredient to make a torch with. Like people using strips of their own clothing you see in movies.

×
×
  • Create New...