auron2401

No, it's VERY easy. If you have a slight economic advantage over your enemy, then it's not only easy, it's the best thing to do. The storehouses / farmhouses was just a temporary solution to any problems which may come out of it. Considering it's a VERY Game changing idea, Certain elements being rebalanced are DEFINITE, You lack INSIGHT, LordIgorIIIofKiev! My idea wouldn't limit.... ANYTHING, infact, it would make some elements of the game actually USABLE. Eg, who the hell uses siege walls and siege forts? You don't need them! You can build anything, everywhere! Thus you can build walls everywhere! ..also, have you.. EVER, played a large map?

Cleopatra aside, Back to suggestions. My suggestion: Settlements. Currently, civic centres and military settlements, can be placed wherever you want them, The only condition is: Is this structure More than 200 (meters? miles? How does 0ad scale it?) away from another one. Now while I find this works okay-ish, sometimes.. it doesn't create a sense of usefulness, they are literally just a form of territory, everyone just slowly expands, and doesn't give an @#$%-rats about certain locations. Anyway, Settlements would function as follows (for the non-aom player) Settlements are neutral/gaia structures, which are placed on the map before the game start (either by random map generator or by or by the map maker). Civ centres can only be placed on said settlements (and military settlements if ptol/selu) Why is this good? Allows map-makers and random-map scripters to regulate game flow.Fixes Priorities: Usually Your first priority would be "build civ centre next to enemy territory, build towers", it would be "build on the civ centre in the middle, to have the most control over resources"Allows for custom maps where civ centres are closer than 200 whatevers apart.allows for maps where there is only 1 settlement per-player on the map (where you have to kill off players to gain access to more tracts of land.Would make roman military camp and siege wall, not so absolutely useless.Maybe make palisades not useless, if they are allowed to be placed in neutral territory?Would make skirmish maps more competitive, in the way starcraft (and the aforementioned AoM) does it. Which is definitely good.Get's rid of the WW1 Trench-warfare gameplay which is the current trend. (which is almost entirely BAD)A problem which would be imposed if this were implemented, as it is, 0ad is a territory based game, and for 9/10 cases, you can only build structures WITHIN said territory. Potential solutions for said problem: Outpost structures, which provide a very small territory area, (maybe half of a military settlements) which you can place storehouses on. (Also functions as a tower?) Allow Farms, farmhouses, and storehouses to be built in neutral territory.

If the technology existed it WAS used, regardless of how often.

Tech pairing would be more useful in Super techs, Which give Huge advantages (and maybe small disadvantages) which would change your playstyle when you research them. Like reforms, you can give yourself +10% farming, or buff the life of your infantry, etc. ..obviously they would be better thought out than that, but my point stands.

You forgot to say: Trading with other players grants a bonus in income. Moreso if you are playing with a carthaginian player.

why.. would you play games on a virtual machine, a windows operating system i can understand (Some games don't run well with WINE, Etc) but... ubuntu? Linux? For what purpose? You won't get viruses on any linux Operating system o.O oh and, Ubuntu is a debian derivative, if you can get a game to run on ubuntu, you can get it to work on debian, period. Edit: unless you are using an OLD Debian, I guess.

Would love to see a pseudo stronghold style game/mod. Really. ...which is what you are basically suggesting. *looks at list* Definately. Love the idea of Canals, though. I do think the water system would need to be changed to implement them. Ships can only sail at the water height, which is always at a set height. (I dislike this greatly) However, if we had something akin to how AoM did it, canals would be possible.

they're extreme for a reason.

...so long as synaptic can see it, all should be well. Anyone who doesn't use synaptic, is either a fool, or only uses terminal. (dem crazy people)... ...the hell @ champions? They do as much damage as heroes. This should NOT be intended. 5 consular bodyguards can take down 2 forts and a Civ centre with barely a man dead. In less than a minute. 50 hack damage a piece?!! We went from buildings being too hard to take down, to them being paper. *sigh*

If you know any bored animators...... there is plenty of work to be done here.

A step backward isn't necessarily a step in the wrong direction. The backwards step gave us a broad overview of what we were looking at, and it allowed us the ability to change it, which would be a step forwards. In a different direction.

*jumps for joy again*

Does it.. eat people off of ships? Please?!

*Jumps for joy* ...*adds new thing to why linux is superior list : 0ad requires a torrent*

The base seems to small for such a.. LARGE, Cannon, mounted on top. Make it longer. maybe make it wider as well? it seems a bit disproportionate.

The mod-loader comes with SVN (or alpha 17) if you don't have it. Sorry if you mentioned having it, TL;DR.

...you stole that off me. I do however, Concur. Alternately, i wouldn't Begrudge giving melee cav to EVERYONE, from civ centers. ...or just making cav production require age2.

I'm not sure, but that reference is probably the attire for hunting?

Pretty sure the only real way you could improve that.. is to make it 100 times taller. lol.

Is the red bit on the pillars player colour?! should be, if it's not.

..how to, when to. different things al-to-gether.

Maybe like, a horse archer where he archer functions like a turret?

He has got a point. Having two lines of fortresses shoot at each other is kind of counter-productive. ..then one side wins, the other side moves back just out of range and sets up a new line of fortress/tower trenches... ....Methinks this needs to change. Possible fix: Maybe make it so you can't build settlements EVERYWHERE, but build them on-top of settlements, like in AoM?! ..could always make resource drop-points be buildable everywhere, if it becomes a problem.

oh.. uh.. Sorry I have a cold. I'm just used to it being in the header picture, i saw the "how to get svn" and presumed the rest of the text was relevant to that. I wish to make a complaint about how you make threads! Important information at the top and How-To's at the bottom! *nodding*

I'll always support a more fleshed out Formations system But it should probably go into it's own thread.