Unarmed

I think the hammers with shield look much better. It looks to me more natural/less out of place. All the building looks good. I have no preference for one, except I have of course preference for the hammers + shield.

Well it's not a big issue to me like I said, but I'll be more specific: -it seems like it does not belong -seems kind of unecessary (i take this back if it is historical) It seems unecessary because you already have the furnace, the weapons lying around and the anvil. But again not a big issue to me, just a opinion. Unless more think the same it's okay to ignore my opinion.

Well, I though Eskimo ment raw meat eater and hence is offensive. Bantu does indeed mean people like I said.

True. And I would think an African with Bantu heritage could tell us what would be a good alternative. If this faction would ever be made, we could always see afterwards if it would be a problem. And I wonder if South-Africans would be bothered by it if they knew that Bantu was used differently in historical context.

I feel the need to tell more about this unknown and perhaps underrated game. Which is free for download at the moment. Gamespot gave it a 9 out of 10, and the users rated it 8.4 . There's no metacritic for this game otherwise I would have told that. Note: don't let the not-so-impressive graphics scare you. I would really like the developers to take a look at this game because I think it would be great inspiration for 0 A.D. Let me tell a little story what makes this game so great (bear in mind I haven't played in a while): So I start a game with the highest number of kingdoms (AI), I think it was 7. In the game the resource is different as 0 A.D (something I wouldn't want in 0 A.D also). There are a few visible rocks (I picked 4) on the map, which reappear randomly on the map after depleted. There are different types, you have copper, clay and iron. Settlements will pay you for different types, if you only have one and a lot of it, it will not make much money. You simply build a mine on top of the piece of rock and you gather it (though you need people inside it and so a village nearby) and you make a factory to process it and a market where it goes to get sold. This type of resource is not a main resource, you just need it to gain money by building markets near settlements or trade with other kingdoms. I'm only going to explain this little bit about this subject, if you want to know more play the game it's free. Ok so most of the time I manage to get first to such a rock and I gain money. Money is needed for generals, spies and buildings, I'm not sure if soldiers also cost money. Most of the time I end up being one of the strongest military and economic powers, now comes the fun part: You would think being the strongest military power and economic power means I can streamroll the other kingdoms and win. Well it is possible, but in Seven Kingdoms you have a reputation system, waging war and killing innocent civilians means losing reputation, the more reputation you lose the less loyal your troops become and they might deflect to other kingdoms and you have the change that your settlements begin to rebel (another feature I wouldn't want in 0 A.D). So what I do is the following instead: Seven Kingdoms shows all sorts of statistics, some I would like in the diplomacy screen of 0 A.D; -who is allied with who -who is at war with who -who has the biggest economy, the most soldiers, the biggest reputation (economy would be nice in 0 A.D, but it should possible be only for friendlies) So I look which one is my biggest competion, the number 1 or the number 2. Than I look at his enemies and at the underdogs. What I than do is giving his enemies, or underdogs as much money as I can so the kingdoms weaken eachother and I'm sitting in my base relaxing. Most of the time I give underdogs lots of support (I always wished I could give units to them, I see this is planned in 0 A.D, please do this!). Even so, most of the time they die off anyway, they get bankrupt or they are crushed. Though it does pay off sometimes and I gain supremacy in a very fun way (I steamroll my enemies when they are all weak). What's funny, sometimes a underdog that I gave a lot of money, and I sometimes fight with them and agree to declare war to their enemies, ends up becoming so strong that my evil plan stabs me in the back. This winning through diplomacy might not appeal to all, and it was sort of forced by the reputation system that made waging war costly, however I would like to be able to do this in 0 A.D without being forced to. The 0 A.D design document says this: If it is up to me it would become like this: See also, post #39, from this thread: http://www.wildfireg...=20#entry270730 Here I explain some more about the diplomacy, and how the AI diplomacy behaved in Seven Kingdoms. More about Seven Kingdoms: -spies were interesting, you could kill enemy generals, steal structures, bribe soldiers, steal information (I see the developers want something similar) -combat was nothing interesting, other games were superior in this, though it did have units leveling up and generals were interesting - you needed them for morale and to let your units level up in barracks. Units could level up by being in a barracks with a general or through combat. I think they should have made it so that there was a limit when being in a barracks and that the remaining experience should be gained while fighting (you could have very strong soldiers by doing nothing) There was also a sequel, Seven Kingdoms 2: the Frythan wars, which is rated one point higher as the original game. I have only played the demo but, it has: -Age of Empires style graphics -Age of Empires style units (in the original you had citizen soldiers basicly and no cavalry and stuff like that) -I think you could do false flag operations but I'm not sure it was not in the demo, but it sounds awesome There is also Seven Kingdoms: conquest, which is a disgrace to the series. It is rated a 2.0 on Gamespot and other sites. It turned Seven Kingdoms in a generic real time strategy without anything interesting. I feel sorry for the people that made it but if I read the reviews it must be horrible. They took away all the features of Seven Kingdoms, the name being the only thing familiar. Do not buy this. So I hope the developers take a look at this game Seven Kingdoms which is free, or perhaps Seven Kingdoms 2, because I think the diplomacy is something that is really lacking right now, and has much more potential. I could understand that some people don't want to have diplomacy in competitive games, but since you can lock teams this should not be a problem.

I think it's great. The only thing I'm not that keen on is the symbol above the door, but I'm not bothered by it and am not going to mention it again.

Seven Kingdoms had neutral settlements (one building consisting of several tiny buildings would portray this, Seven Kingdoms had very unrealistic scaling). You could build a barracks next to it and if you had a general with high stats (low stat generals do not work that well, and are bad for your soldiers loyality), it would slowly lose it's neutrality. You could also pay them to make this go faster or you could attack the building but when you did that villagers would attack you and the settlement would lose villagers which in Seven Kingdoms are needed to make soldiers. Seven Kingdoms is a great unique game and since it is free I really suggest to try it out so you can see how everything works. We could use somethings of the system of Seven Kingdoms to make the Age of Empires 3 system more interesting. Instead of natives instantly becoming available when you build something (the outpost would be great for this!), it could take time before the natives allow you to recruit soldiers. You would be able to speed up this progress by giving them rescources. Seven Kingdoms had a very good diplomacy. Let me explain (I only played singleplayer by the way): In the beginning you are all neutral. You can request to trade, the ai sometimes declines this. You can choose to be friendly, which I believe is needed to trade. You can also choose to ally, then you can see eachother. You can also give eachother technologies (Seven Kingdoms had siege engines which needed to be researched in science labs) and of course money, but also food. The Ai would sometimes ask for some money (and food and technologies). In Seven Kingdoms it seemed like AI had different personalities, because some did not ask, they were demanding that you give them lots of money or else they would .... you up!. Sometimes AI would also ask you to have a trade embargo (rescources were very different in Seven Kingdoms and were rather scarce, but very important to generate money) or declare war to a faction (Seven Kingdoms had a reputation system something I don't see happening in 0 A.D, low reputation ment your troops became less loyal and would go to another kingdom, and villagers would rebel if reputation was low. You can't just go to war in Seven Kingdoms because that means you'll have angry people and unloyal soldiers). Back to the AI. If you did not give them money they requested or demanded, they would break alliances with you or break trade with you and in extreme cases declare war to you. Though some did not seem to care if you did not do it. I would love to have a better diplomaticy system similar to Seven Kingdoms, but without things that could not be done (reputation and loyality that kind of stuff can't be done) Many of the features (reputation, loyality, generals) of Seven Kingdoms do not fit in 0 A.D, but it's worth to take a look at and take inspiration from it. I recommend to take a look at it. It takes some time to get used to but it's great. I'm not talking about the disgrace called Seven Kingdoms: conquest, but the old game Seven Kingdoms. Gamespot gave this game a 9 out of 10, and it has a user score of 8.4, I think the user score is lower because it is not beginner friendly (I got this game as a kid, and it took me 5 years to get used to the game and then I loved it). I would like it if you did this. And in name of the holy spaghetti monster, check out Seven Kingdoms everybody!

Sorry Micket for this discussion. Just keep on doing what you do well.

Thank you for pointing out. Though I still think while it is fine, it is awesome by the way, I would rather do this later until the important biomes are more or less finished. I'm made a list but many animals could be created by modifying existing textures which I'm doing now. I totally understand you. Mayans are something I would personally not do (at least not until very later) because to me it makes more sense that they went deeper into Africa than going to another continent. Ironically in history it is the other way around (correct me if wrong). Yes I ment one building per minifaction if we go for the Age of Empires 3 system. But there would need to be a trading post, but I think the outpost would be great for this. No fortress or barracks for the Bantu though, makes little sense to me, they would all be citizen-soldiers. Bantu people while archicultural would be communities or tribes ruled by chiefs. They might have warriors but I don't think they had true fulltime soldiers. Native Americans were also archicultural and some made big cities but they didn't have true fulltime soldiers to my knowledge or fortresses. Aztecs and Mayans are a different story. ________________________________________________ Back to the Bantu. I could look for the Bantu word for Africans. Easier said than done: http://language.psy....oup=A&sort=word Very few words. And I must say I don't fully understand this site. Village, which is in this database, would be useful to know if we would go for a Age of Empires 3 system. But I don't understand it well.

Welcome! Now I am really going to bed.

Yeah true, didn't thought of that. (What would be good though? Zulu Wiki?) Well there is not really a good alternative in case of the Bantu. If somebody could find it, speaking for myself, I would be someone to change it. And now I really need to go to bed.

It seems like it is agreed that, if it would ever be implemented, it would need to be optional. There are people who like it and people who don't. It seems much easier to let scenario makers decide if they want it. On the other hand, if you do not like it, it seems very annoying if you happen to pick a map that happens to have something you don't want. So in that way a option, which is much more work I think though, seems better. Whatever it would be, if it were ever implemented, a option to have aggressive animals on/off seems like a good idea for (very) competive players. Though I have no idea how much work that is.

I want to take peoples concerns serious, so I thought of some alternatives, but I must say I agree with Mythos. While it is a fact that Bantu was used negatively in the Apartheid area in South-Africa, and to some people the word may have a negative feeling, it is the right word for these people really. Bantu means people, the Afrikaans wikipedia (partly Dutch language, South African people) does not have something about it being offensive. I thought the swastika was recieved alright, but I searched and see a small amount of people really concerned. Man these kind of things are tough for a developer. I mean nakedness and too much violence is a no brainer since you want to think of the small kids, but these kind of things where only a small percentage is seriously bothered/affected by it, I would find it really frustrating because I'm someone who doesn't get easily offended. (Not saying I don't understand these kind of things, but since it is in another context, I see little issue) And note that this is just an idea, it might not even make it in the game ever (though I would like the challenge of creating it partly).

Very interesting thanks for sharing this information, I will take it very serious, though I guess I should have made a thread about this since this is not supposed to be in the topic. (9gag has many edited pictures from movies, series, photos taken from facebook (I don't think with permission), other images.) Maybe someone can move this to a new thread.

Mind you I come from the Netherlands, and I don't have many people descended from Africans here. We have a word similar to the n word, but instead of g's it has k's, which is considered offensive. Though some appearently do not like the word Negro (the Dutch version, same word though), I had to look that up. I had no idea it was considered hurtful. Wiki said some wanted to erase this word from the dictionary. But I've seen descriptions saying "searching negroid man" on a Dutch government site, so I though if they used it it must not be okay. The swastika is actually in the game. I shall do some research and I did some. But the problem is that most ethnicies only came into existance far later. If we didn't have that problem it would be great to go for the specific ethnicies so we can have several interesting African units. Like Kongo clubmen. They could be called native central-Africans, but I dunno, that sounds bad to me. Bantu means people in Bantu language. Maybe I can do something with that, though I have to be really creative.

Wow. I had no idea it was that strict. Though it looks like it is not always enforced. If you look at something like 9gag (which I mostly dispise but that's not important), it has numerous copyright violations. And at school we learn that as long as you show where you got it from in case of pictures, and if you found information and write it in your own words you are fine (but the latter seems okay). So now I'm wondering. I've seen modellers using pictures to make their model, wouldn't that also be copyright violation?

Thank you for being more specific. I appreciate it. I'm not a developer but I think it's important to make the game appeal to as many types of players as possible. Maybe their could even be a mode of some sorts that removes all those random things and one that has these sort of things. Or perhaps it would be better to be map related. In Seven Kingdoms you had several options for a game. Again I can recommed it to try it out since it is free. From my memory without obvious ones like number of players: -frythans (the monsters) on/off -frythans aggressive or defensive -victory condition -resources nearby -numbers of resources -Ai aggresive passive etc. -emergent factions on/off Some of these things would be really nice to have in 0 A.D . Resources nearby. Someone suggested having rescources not near your settlement. I would like this, but I feel this might make the game too difficult for new/casual players. A option would solve this. Raiding and attacking animals. Instead of monster options there could be the animal options: -aggressive on/off (meaning both raiding and attacking or those could be seperate) Passive and aggressive AI I guess this is not needed as you can just put AI to easy. Perhaps they could be under options (where population is)? But yeah someone would need to implement this and it sounds much easier than it would be. I think I'm going to play a round of Seven Kingdoms... To see how it was again. EDIT: too many customizable options are also problematic though. Though there could be default modes with specific options so nobody gets confused.

Hmm, that's very problematic. Since their is no other good way to describe these peoples. They spoke Bantu and even in my history book they are called Bantu. Also I think you mean the other n word. Negro is not that bad or is it?

Oh god I made this topic off-topic. Well it would work in practice if you would ever face battering ram to battering ram. Hehe. I assume the way to destroy them was fire (I thought I read that in a medieval book) and simply going inside and kill the men manning it. I think the battering rams need a bit of work. They seem too fast, and on the other hand way to vulnerable to arrows. Though they are already quite strong. I'm not going to respond to a second post regarding this topic. I don't want to derail this thread.

Note that I'm more or less a noob. Though lately I've been practicing drawing a lot, but mostly in Flash (Flash is easier, but Gimp is better). Some species I listed could just be reskins. I'm modifying textures by the way. It's the easiest and fastest way. Might try to make textures from scratch, but right now I'm not going to make it more difficult than it should be. I have made a Chital which is basicly the current deer but with some white dots and some brownish stripes. I'm going to test it out, there is a nice 0 A.D tutorial on how to do that. The fallow deer can also be a reskin, though it has quite distinct antlers. I have quite some ideas for skin variations and specific species skins for generic animals. The generic gazelle for example (it is a African one), it is fine to make, or what I do, modify, a texture and turn them into gazelles that would live in Turkey and the Middle East. Even the leopard could just be a reskin of the female lion. By the way, lions look a bit small too me. Not a biggie just pointing out. Of course in real life some species would differ in size, but I think such a thing can be ignored unless someone would like to help out (Note: that I'm talking about different gazelle species for example or different kinds of deer, so not size between a lion and a tiger). (Even I would not like to do it, I would prefer to make the most common ones, after that the most distinct, and maybe then I would like to do size differences and other body features)

Bump. I want to get back to the Age of Empires 3 idea for mini factions. I played the Age of Empires 3 demo, and I must I like that system. It seems easier to implement. The positive -less buildings would need to be made (only houses bunched together)* -less units could be made, instead of lots of boring units -together with the territory sytem this could be really interesting -seems like more mini-factions could be made this way The negative -I don't like how the Age of Empires 3 natives just sit there doing nothing - no gathering, no attacking (building is not necessary really) -*Every existing faction would need a trading post -very important: this system conflicts with the current mercenary system Negative number 1. I have no idea how the natives would gather or attack. Maybe it's better to not have it. It's a game, somethings are better left simplified. Negative number two. Instead of the trading post, the outpost could be used. I think this brings interesting features: -outpost becomes more valuable -you would not have to gain territory which seems better, but outpost needs to be repaired to have control over the natives Negative number three. It does not have to conflict. Some units would be allied to existing factions or in futher away lands. Seems like less of an issue than I first thought. Also, like Age of Empires 3, there could be specific upgrades which you wouldn't normally have. This way we only have to do Bantu houses and can do the most interesting of the units. The Scythians could also been done this way perhaps.

I notice this with the other bot, improved version of qBot. I played 100 and they didn't make soldiers. Would it be a bug or is the other bot modified that it does not have dynamics/that it has a bug.

The biomes I mean more animals and also plants, as I've seen some errors. Placeholders are fine, like rabbits instead of actual hares, but I'm not keen on wildebeests in Turkey (if I remember correctly. I thought <something> badlands was in Turkey and it had wildebeests) I also saw pheasants for alpine and temperate. Pheasants are not native to that area. Though it is a fact that the Romans brought them to Europe, and thanks to the Romans and 18th century hunters they now do live in all of Europe. Pheasants were bred by Romans for meat, so it's better to make them passive and have them in the mediterranean area. The pheasant thing might be real nitpicking I guess and not many people would be bothered and so it could be ignored. But the wildebeest is something that I think does deserve to be changed. I definatly would, however I first want to make some skins for existing animals, to turn some generic species into specific species and also some real life variations (modifying existing textures). After that, I would like to do it. I enjoy writing. I think it would be a good idea to post what I came up with on the forum so people can give their opinions and then I could make that patch perhaps. I also need native English speakers for error detection. I scored above average on English at school but I still make errors from time to time. Good that you say this. I understand. Though what I'm wondering is if I would have read something and describe it in my own words. Is that okay? I was also wondering, I made some concepts for a mod I would want to make one day (very, very, very far in the future or never). I used pictures and drawed on top of them to use the specific features. I would delete the actual picture and the thing I drawed would be a different picture that looks a bit like the original picture. Some of them I used more than one picture (like one for the nose, one for the headshape). Would this be an issue if I ever make the mod and have these pictures as unit portraits?

I'm not fond of the list choices. That's all. Obviously animals are not as important as factions. I would totally understand it if they would be something for expansion packs. Again, just not so fond of the list choices. I'm now working on some textures. Some variations for animals, and for generic animals to turn them in specific species. Aaah, time, if only we had more. Even when I have lots of it, I seem to have not enough as I would like to do more. I think it's really impressive what has been done in these years by the way. There are mods that do worse though some games are not actually mod friendly, modding almost seems like a thing of the past. But this is a game, but I think that's more impressive as it is build from the ground up.

One of the moments I started laughing was when I was playing the game for the first time and I build a watchtower and then the Ai started building a watch tower on the other side. I was like; Haha, what is this for silly game! Another moment was when a battering ram attacked another battering ram. Though I guess it would work in theory.