Romulus

In time this will prove useful. Almost certainly for an online multi player world. And I do believe I actually queried about map adjustments just the other day

Theoretically you can do anything you want. You just have to synchronize your mind with the game's source first to learn its design before you start hacking it.

This is just an idea I've had. Basically each person in the RP is a king or queen of a given faction and everyone diplomatically and militarily strives to build it. This sounds like an online methodology, but not quite as such. It's basically using a forum to engage politics rather than actually being an absolute enemy in game play. Think about it as an enrichment system of game play. Another feature for this setup is the multi user capability. What this basically is, is the ability for more than one player to control one faction. So how this will work basically is, say I want Lion.Kanzen for example to be a general in my army, he can control a group of my soldiers and go on campaign against an enemy, or just expansion into neutral territory. I may decide to have another general or whatever. There can even maybe be another feature where if I am king, I have some sort of system where I could potentially lose the peoples favour by a constant log on my actions by the AI, a script that measures my actions as good, bad, hmm, or totally woeful, then it triggers the citizens to then rebel against my army or whatever and initiates an outbreak of civil war. Causing all sorts of pandemonium and chaos within an empire, inviting either Lion.Kanzen to march his legion in and take over or another faction launching an assault. So in layman's terms and from a conceptual point of view... This is like controlling an AI being the the king, but the AI is a separate "thinking" entity and can to a measure based on the kings actions be loyal, or disobedient to whatever the cause and situation. Raising of taxes, coinage implemented in the game. So each player has in actual fact a unit which is him in the game. He has to protect this unit or get eliminated if its killed. A new commerce can be introduced with the all new slave trade. Then we can barter one another for like example... "Okay Mythos_Ruler... I have 26 slaves I can trade you for 500 wood." Or I gots 40 slaves I stole from Leper, that Mythos can give me a piece of Lepers territory he stole, or whatever... So why slaves? What hell is this about? Slaves van be a great source of commerce, but what do they do???? Slaves can build things exceptionally fast. Slaves can keep the general populace happy. Slaves can also gather exceptionally fast ... So in a way who wouldn't want a slave if it means a much higher rate in both production, and development and to cater for the general needs and wants from the standard populace? All of this takes place on a massive map hosted by a server. A devoted subforum for this can have a the map status of current prestige and empire borders. Like it was a genuine living world with a significant agenda to it. Is this conceptually interesting or this a bit technical?

Roman girls were often blonde.

Roman ladies were the most beautiful in the world... Like Venus herself... How barbaric women loathed and envied them.http://cache.desktopnexus.com/thumbnails/1328284-bigthumbnail.jpg Sigh....

That is not souly true. Egyptian woman had the eagle nose. Like Cleopatra. Roman nose has a big bridge that's all. And those women are hot. Nice looking and I bet great in bed. It has been documented that Roman ladies were the best in bed, and you talk about brauny garlic girls and Spartan woman... They didn't move and ride like the Roman gals

The Romans changed from a military power to a religious power. Black death had nothing to do with it's evolution

Lead tastes nice when you lick it off their skin. And anyway... The upper class citizens did, and not really that many.

Roman women were the most prettiest though. Garlic women...ooops I meant (Gallic) were gross. They cover their hair in deer fat. And briton women were even more disgusting. Whether the women of Rome were sexy, well mannered and their hair were as flaxen resembling Venus herself. Roman women FTW!

This thread should actually be moved to Help & Feedback.

I would like something similar to this, where a teams colour fills in his territory to better see current empires

Yes! That's the movie Yes but the ones in the movie are wrong. Lions got it right Roman crusifixes were generally massive, because they want people to see it a far

Yeah even you guys need to watch Spartacus the movie the old one. @Lion yeah if you think about it, in the Middle ages there was the same thing with witches at the steak. More Witches were burnt in dark ages than women killed by Rome in its Empire. But it was still Rome's power! Under Roman Catholicism

You all forgetting that the Y crucifix was used in "inverted" Romans did crucify people, and the most famous aside from Jesus was Spartacus and all who served him were crucified along the apien way... The inverted crucifixion was for more serious punishment and was really for those committed great crimes against the Roman Empire Peter one of Jesus's deciples was crucified upside down ....

So I guess now I mentioned it, its going to get changed huh? lol... At the moment Mythos_Ruler, its unbalanced. As it is now is totally illogical and insensible. And buildings should be destroyed with siege weapons. Not units. Enough said. You all can disagree with me, but in the end I am right and you know it. But because you don't try and balance this in another way, you compromise realism for something that isn't possible. So disagree away. I really don't care.

Don't you agree aswell? If you think about it... It really makes no sense. The repair option is still there for the palisades. Which by the way are more lethal than the fort if built in a certain way. So that's three of us that agree

I have to admit those slingers are an absolute pest lol And the way I like to play, generally stirs abit of bothery against Wraiitis bot on higher difficulty levels. Used to an AI attacking with 3 maybe 5 units early in the game... But this AI swarms the village with an entire army. Which is actually something that's new in this genre. Because now you can have proper contest. Interesting to see how his bot evolves over the course of alphas Having battled both Spartans and Athenians, Spartans use fewer units compared to the Athenians. I think maybe in time you could focus on making the Athenian navy strong as well. Because next to the Phoenecians these guys were the mightiest at sea. Sparta had a strong army, but few, as indeed how the AI applies. For the Persians though, in terms of numbers these guys put everyone to shame. Everything was bigger, lots of people, but inferior. So their navy and units need to be very very cheap but not so strong. And I haven't played in the lobby yet, because I'm waiting for a new router and ISP change, but certainly accept the dual If you play as Persians, then I will play as Macedonia... That should be pretty epic

Thanks for for some clarity. I completely forgot about the capture building option But I'm glad you agree in a way that the encampment has to have a repaire option, makes perfect logical sense. Also I really, really don't mind the thing losing life in enemy territory... But not when there's units garrisoned inside. There's a point of consideration. But thanks for the clarity

Wait a minute... I'm talking about a wooden entrenched campment. Not a stone castle.... But according to you, I should build cc near it to stop it from dying? Unrealistic. Romans never ever built a town near a tempory fort. If that was the case, Europe today would be filled with rubble from towns everywhere. And Romans are the strongest cause I say so

Sure, but at least put back the repair building option. I disagree with virtually everyone of your statements. First you forgetting Rome was/is the strongest. They have a right to have their encampments strong. These encampments saved the lives of real soldiers, countless times. So anything against this, I'm not inclined to agree with. The annoying fortress bit of your post, I think is irrelevant... Because Romans can only build an encampment in the third age. So the opponent had of at least a small force in which to ward off an attack. Buildings should be destroyed by siege weapons....... Picture units carrying a pointed ram and run and bash buildings... This should be be a fine way to even things. So this really an request for the repair option. Sure one can and modify it, but I think the game as a whole needs it.

I'm getting errors loading saved games. Just so as you know. Maybe you can check that out too.

I would just like to say that whoever was responsible for balancing the Macedonian units etc, has got it spot on. I thought I'd try them out, and I thought I'd create a little army and just see how far I go without having to create more units... Just like a realistic Alexander scenario, taking a lone single army on a conquest. Hardest set set AI, 2 teams Athenians & Sparta This was the army that I used to win the game. I didn't create any new units. And this is what I was left with at the very last battle.... Military Stats: Route: This could be valuable information for a scenario to be made in the future. Specially for Alexander. Creating a scenario where you play as Alexander and you lead a small army, to defeat your enemy. If you army dies then you lose the scenario... Or something to that effect... But regards to the individual for balancing this, job well done

Also why is the wedge formation only for cavalry? Infantry or most notably the Roman infantry used wedge formations. Please give it to the Romans as a unique formation.

I played Athenians hardest. In total in 5 matches against hardest AI Greeks, 4000 VS 470 Romans ... 4000 dead Pretend the Athens hero comes here and lays his sword at my feet.

Well the the design choice is incorrect. Yes the forts were temporary, but only when the Romans decided to leave did they dismantle the encampment. Otherwise they maintained it.