Jump to content

alkazar-ipse

Community Members
  • Posts

    105
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

797 profile views

alkazar-ipse's Achievements

Sesquiplicarius

Sesquiplicarius (3/14)

1

Reputation

  1. the lag is not a very strong argument as it has to be dealt with on a much, much larger scale (having 300 pop attacking should be possible) as for the realisme, it's a game and will remain unrealistic, even if you make people work in a house to forge a specific weapon, and make shoes and god knows what else. nice to bring up the idea, I don't find it convincing yet, but looking forward to getting convinced
  2. I was already like... "did I miss something? why am I always rushing to age 3 to get siege and attack if I could do it earlier?"
  3. I don't like the idea neigther
  4. ?! before third phase? with what building if I may ask?... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So basicly, you have settlers, good workers, defensless on one side, and soldiers, armed from feet to teeth, very lazy at work on the other. You can switch between these two by clicking on "call to arm" button (with consequences: go to nearest drop place and change phisical aspect) BUT that is a much deeper change, then just realism or whatever, but rather a radical modification in the concept of what a worker/soldier is. Untill now: wemen are faster at gathering food (from farms or bushes) and men FIGHT AND gather other stuff faster. This new concept makes us have 3 unit types: 2 worker types, of which one can ALSO be soldier type, switch back and forth as player pleases...
  5. True, but that is an AI issue. I played against human opponents much weaker then me, but they still sometimes have siege even earlier then me.
  6. At the moment 10 catapults , if a LITTLE bit protected against melee units by skirmishers on the back, kill your " ing" skirmishers
  7. Against a rush you dont have too many towers to manually manage them, and on a hard push siege units will make your towers go nuts, so thinking about attacking the right spot with the right units at the right moment (ie cav on siege when infantery runs after some ranged units) is much more important then putting some guys in some towers... (just my opinion) I agree though that some civ have completly overpowered towers, and I guess its ment to balance out something else, even though I have no clue. I dont mind if townbell affects soldiers in some way or an other, as long as its reasonable...
  8. I dont really understand " " Instead of selecting 20 wemen, send them to civ center, select another 5 into a tower, you can just click on a bell in civ center OR tower, and it will compute shortes way, number of people already there etc. Soldiers carry weapons, at least for 0AD PART 1, if you want it or not (As I understood from mythos_ruler's statements), So where is the problem? they don'^t need to hide. They keep working, and don't dare any enemy attack them , cuz they fight back. I'm trying to make it sound funny here, but what I mean is: if you want to garnison SOLDIERS, then you do it manually. Otherwise already implemented stances hold.
  9. of course, we all agree (i guess and hope at least), that there should be a townbell to make wemen in a certain range to get in a secure place.
  10. I'd like to see a REAL multiplayer game online. I 'd actually love to play in it my self You know, A decent 2v2, and not just an ignorant guy speeking about men doing the fighting, because he doesn't know they can gather, most things even better, then wemen. I haven't found a (cheap) way of recording games, PLUS I'd like to play a recorded game with some of the better skilled players (thinking about quantumstate, since he is the strongest I ever played against) @ Mythosruler: I heard you are a pretty strong player, would you have the software to organize such a recording?
  11. nice to see sb shares my opinion
  12. Well, If they'r really ment to play differently from the beginning on, then I understand it better now. However, I have other things that concern me more then the numnber of factions (as infinit javelos and such)
  13. I find it much more important for realisme that siege units would stop being pieces of wood spooking around, its so scary, I always feel like a ghost is in my screen. Just my opinion...
  14. yes you click and drag. if you just click, there is no rotation.
  15. I respect the idea(soldiers deposit weapons, get tools and vice versa), but what exactly is the goal? the purpose? If it's more realisme then you are compleatly off the road. This doesnt give more realism: first, I dont think people worked in a none secure zone completly defens less at that time (within their city walls maybe...)... But that is actually not really my point anyway... My main concern is: you deposit your weapons in the CivCenter, then you go build a resource place, you go to work, you go back to the resource place to get your weapon?, where did they come from? You see, even in making soldiers get their weapons, you still simplify the system, by having get them ANYWHERE, without keeping trac of how many weapons are where. So why not just simplify the WHOLE system and assume soldiers carry weapons with them...? It a game, not a reallife simulatior. If realisme is NOT your main motivation, then please make your statements explicit, and tell why on earth this should be usefull?...
×
×
  • Create New...