Romulus
-
Posts
470 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Posts posted by Romulus
-
-
Well I believe vassals are very realistic.
Throughout ancient history there have been vassals to conquering empires.
For example after Caesars great conquest over Gaul the Gauls became a vassal. But because they lacked enough numbers after that war to rebel and no weapons and resources (ceased by mighty Roma) they could not rebel.
In 0 A.D. We need an AI that mimics this reality. Where as the "conqueror" you can dictate and control your vassal in some ways by limiting their pop cap limit, including the size of army they make etc etc.
The whole idea with this is, you can use your vassals for added income and army contribution.
Say I want to attack another enemy but I don't want to waste my men, I can just send the vassal's
If if the vassal disobey or defies the might of your empire, you send in your army to stamp down authority and rule and slaughter the troops the vassal gathered to launch a rebellion.
-
Well according to mainsteam history the Dorians were the first settlers of Greece and Minoa Crete.
But, the Dorians before they settled in Greece there's a possibility that a branch ventured west and occupied Germania and Gaul eventually settling in Briton.
The Dorians are very ancient indeed and because of this good luck findong any VALID sources about them.
It just remains theory and hardly factual by any standard.
-
Castra
Singular Castrum
Roman word for buildings that military. This where the English word castle comes from.
-
1
-
-
There's some evidence that the Celts were Dorians.
Dorians were the first Greek settlers. It is however not really supported because most of the evidence is vanished by shear time.
In my honest opinion, the Celts originated from the east and the later day Goth movements in the first century were a type of repeat demonstrating to us our the Celtic people came into existence.
This is true with Hunic peoples and the whole emergence of the barbarians. These were the fathers of the Celts.
-
1
-
-
The Romans in republic have no kings especially in Ceasars time.
So the Romans get a Tribune or general. He will be the "king" or hero figure which if he's jilled game over.
But he must have greater hitpoints and attack, possibly an aura that if troops are in the aura they gather faster have added attack etc, etc, etc...
-
The assassins. They will have an added attack bonus against a hero and king.
-
Yes
Vassals. But that's not the same as being an ally.
Vassals are conquered and subdued. But an ally is independent without influence.
But it will be very very nice to have vassals rather than game over. You essentially control conquered enemies and as vassals they pay you monthly or a given time x amount of resources or a menu that you can specify what type and the amount
-
Cool
I may have missed it. But the new maps are very nice... Most of them need to be included in the skirmish maps in the next alpha
-
In the near future ill make a guide with some strategies I use. My style of playing.
The new AI attacks in approx 15-20 minutes with a relatively small army. In the beginning build towers. Don't bother about walls... Walls are for when things get really hectic and bad for your city.
Remember that walling yourself particularly against a human player is in actual fact disadvantageous because you can easily be starved. Your resources will eventually deplete spending it on troops and defenses when the enemy besieging you has the entire map to plunder and invest in the assault.
Expansion over territory with wood and iron is wise. And farms are essential because if the enemy ceases your lands occupied where your iron mines and forestry is, you can assign many villagers to farm and barter food for other resources.
Guard your farms with many soldiers during an attack.
So most of this applies against a human but in time the AI will improve and probably other scripters might introduce several of their own so be patient.
-
1
-
-
Very nice. And very historical.
-
1
-
-
YES!!
And another thing...
We need a loyalty thing where allies lose or gain loyalty towards you and a script that makes allies respond to most commands when the loyalty is high.
If loyalty is low the script needs random possibilities that either make the ally rebel etc.
-
1
-
-
I don't know about everyone else, but I like diplomacy and the political aspects in an RTS very much. After all this is realism and a very if not the most important aspect of the time and game.
Is there plans to make the current AI more diplomatic?
Things I'd really like include:
Lots and lots of ally commands...
Attack
Defend
Send reinforcements
Man the walls
Build a building or fortification here
Send resources
_____________
And strategy
Command allies in battle with different strategic options like flank or troop movement.
These are very few suggestions but this will be such an integral part of the game
-
2
-
-
I hope this doesn't become a trend. This is a big no no for me.
What happened to the menu that let's you choose the number of players in the game? Why is there now a default number to map types.
...
-
I would like to point out that having spies capable of assassinating heroes would be overpowered without some balancing.
Yes definitely.
I would suggest making them very expensive and weak but a script that gives them an added attack bonus against heros and kings
-
1
-
-
Upsss XD.
Ok but with Regicide or Herocide. May be we can see in this alpha(16). And sorry with the topic off, I was awake late and when I read that I think you want talk about spies.
Now if you want a eye candy unit. We need make 3d props and the give some texture. Idanwin open a eye candy art we can use a default king, queen, etc.
I was talking to idanwin
It will be cool to have spy units though. Also you can use them as assassins!! That will be cool and fun.
Kings and queens need to be able to fight. You can also use them in battle as a hero because they will have added hitpoints and attack and moral boosting abilities to nearby troops.
-
Really exactly. WHO SAID ANYTHING about having spies??? lol.... Jeez.
How would a spy work????
Here idanwin learn the ABC before you read this........
-
Burzum2 I created temporary because I needed to contact the admin I was locked out of burzum 1
So to make everyone's life less of a hassle I just decided to create another one which I should of done in the beginning. Lolz I know but extremely irritating.
-
Sorry for the late reply
It appears to be working now. But you can test it for yourself on a Windows box with a standard installation of Alpha 15
-
I'll go first.
First of all....
Let me start the Romans laying siege to a Medieval castle.
There is no civilization adept at siege than glorious Rome. No army powerful and sophisticated in the arts of pure warfare.
When the Romans lay siege it's normally on an epic scale beyond the scale of Medieval times. The Romans had no probelm whatsoever in investing 20 + years! in one siege. The logistic greatness of the Empire is one of many advantagous elements of the Roman legion(s) providing provisions and planning which are essential during times of war. Order.
The Romans did not have Trebuchets for long distance bombardment, but balistas and onagers.Roman balastas were massive compared to Medieval derivitives of such siege equipment and were devastating.
THe Medieval army inside a castle in my honest opinion is the worst situation if not sucicide against a Roman assualt for they are small compared to a Roman castrum and therefore could not last for years without starvation being the factor of defeat nor projectiles in defense.
Conclusion? Romans obliterate medieval fortifications.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Lets look at how Romans defend their castra against a Medieval army.
This is probably very menacing in it's own right. Because first the trebuchets will totally level the building inside the fortified walls of the castra and arrows from longbowmen ignited with burning pitch will set ablaze the Roman building in a great fog of fire and smoke.
But will balistas inside, the Romans pound and shoot an advancing army towards the walls, Romans dug spikes and moats infront of their walls impedeing any army's approach and should an army of knights and men at arms get near the Romans hurl thousands of pilum blacking the skies totally halting the flanks of the enemy. Shouldsome manage to get past the dealy pilum the Romans shields and the sharp gladius blades punch and stab incomers like a war machine.
Conclusion?
The Medieval army will not have the capacity and funds and enough man power to totally engage in a long campaing for a siege against the Romans. And should they try and starve the Romans they will send word and bring in legions upon legions like bees out of a hive.
Heavy knights of horseback will try and charge the flanks of the Legions as they advance, but before the horses meet the Roman flank hand to hand, the pilum penetrates the horses and knight alike atleast wiping out hundreds or seriously wunding them in which case a retreat is highly likely.
-
A castrum is a Roman term to describe building reserved for the army. The English word caslte come from this word.
Now as the title suggests, imagine, if you had a Medieval army besiege a Roman castrum and vise versa.
Romans lay siege to a Medieval castle.
______________________________________
ROMAN CASTRA
MEDIEVAL CASTLE
Celts or Gauls?
in Introductions & Off-Topic Discussion
Posted
Yeah according to a text book I have here which is in actual fact a type of atlas.
It states that the Dorians in 1000-1100 BC from north-west of Greece invaded and conquered in quote "the sophisticated Myceneans" and settled in an arc stretching from the Peloponnese through the Southern aegean islands to mainland Anatolia (Turky)
Now technically the Myceneans weren't technically Greek in the sense we know it, or before Greece was even born into a nation identified as Helenes.
And one can only imagine that note it said "sophisticated" which all this was was the first barbaric incursions reminiscent of the early Goth and Hunic invasions. Like a type of cycle that repeats every 1000 years or so.
The Huns and the like were the later descendants of the Dorians. This also explains the Mysterious appearance of the Turkish horse archers that overran the Byzantine Empire in Anatolia.
Horse archery was the art of the Mongols and the Huns and I bet the Turkish horse archers were Huns.
Here's the thing, after Atilla's war what happened to the Huns? They had to of gone somewhere and because they didn't have a country, colony or city you can know exactly or pin point a place of origin.
Parthia were exceptional horse archers but these people too were composition of assyrians/babylonians/persian and definitely the Dorian Hunic variants
But talking about the expanse and movement of peoples in a by-gone-era are just tautologies and its like talking about race and the Aryans and soon this crosses the line of controversy and certainly becomes folklore.