wowgetoffyourcellphone

Thank you. Putting this here for future reference: I think mimicking this aesthetic style would still be nice:

@Stan` and I have actually started a repo for Empires Besieged here: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/empires_besieged. The last change was 11 months ago, but I'm working on things in DE (Guptas and Sasanians; a big thank you to @Duileoga and @Lopess) which will directly translate to EB at some point in the future. So, whether EB becomes it's own "game" or an "era" or an "expansion" or a "release" is up for debate. I personally advocate for a "0 A.D. Eras" concept, where players can swap between eras (Empires Ascendant, Empires Besieged, Masters of Bronze, Millennium AD) and only play those civs, or choose to play with all civs available at once.

I would love to have such a feature in the game for multiple things, such as wheat fields. But for now, what I mean is that we can have different variations of the structure so that it will look different sometimes when you build one (like how there are helmet variations).

Nice catch. Any suggestions for a more accurate "symbol" representing them?

I like having multiple actor variations for the Royal Kurgan. Good idea. Ideally, I would agree with you. But I think with some civilizations, cultures, factions, that it's more difficult to pick a specific structure (see: Cimbri). So, picking a type of structure is okay, in my mind, especially if it's one of that culture's iconic structures. Kurgans definitely fit that bill! I like @Grautvornix's suggestion of having multiple actor variations.

Mmm... A structure which inspires little wonder, honestly.

I propose we change the "Persians" in the game to "Achaemenids" to differentiate from other Persian empires (one of the likely civs for 'Empires Besieged' would be the Sasanians, another Persian empire). This would entail a lot of changes under the hood, but mainly to just XML files and some jsons, file name changes, etc. I could take care of the pull request for it. Just trying to gauge from the group if anyone would have any objections. This is in the Development forum due to it requiring a large Pull Request to change it (again, a PR I'm willing to personally take responsibility for).

Yeah, let's have a gravel surface one for the Wonder, since it's built by the player and is supposedly "maintained" by their people. And then we have a grass covered one for a map "ruins" object.

Perhaps reverse prop order in the structure's actor.

Yeah, I think the negative space in the courtyard in between the cobblestone and the walls would be dirt. Perhaps we can layer decals?

I think the whole courtyard for the barracks could be cobblestone, but still, nice direction.

The Scythian "house" can just be a cart that can move around.

Thanks for the feedback, but Ima not making the hero medallion smaller. I might get rid of the starter scout medallion though. I guess people don't use it as intended. I'm still working on the unit portraits. lol. It's a long term project, as there are hundreds of unit portraits to go through and it takes a decent amount of time to make a reasonable portrait for each one. I'm glad the 2 new resources aren't overwhelming. I worried about that at first, but I made them gather "passively" for the most part, so are pretty manageable along with the standard 4 "raw" resources.

After reading the discussion, I do think we should ultimately go with something closer to this: But pebbly: Then the "map object" version would be the grassy variation.

I'd honestly like to have both styles in the game. The more exciting one as a Scythian wonder and the "boring" one as a map object.