wowgetoffyourcellphone

Headgear Unit Types: All

Horse Decorations Unit Types: Cavalry

Hero References Unit Types: Heroes

Armor References Unit Types: Elite and Champion Soldiers (aka, Cataphracts, Royal Bodyguards, Elite Cavalrymen)

Basic Tunics and Jackets Unit Types: Basic and Advanced Soldiers, Scythian Male Citizens, Trader Trader and Cart: (trading goods in lieu of family members)

Shaman Clothing and Props Unit Types: Healer Animation Refs:

Female Clothing Unit Types: Scythian Female Citizens, Maiden Head Hunters

The Britons Celts of British Isles Above: Cassivellaunus (left), Cunobelin (right) Above: Caratacos (left), Boudicca (right) Above: Brythonic Citizens (left), Celtic Druid-Healer (right) (One of the Britons heroes, Boudicca, in her infantry form) I need help deciding on a 4th (and possibly 5th) Briton hero. I'm thinking a king, chieftain, or notable figure who resisted Julius Caesar's invasion or the later conquest.

I need to organize the references better so we can get some consistent output. Maybe I'll start that task now.

Well, both references are completely nice. The tunic of the guy on the left is great. The shield is nice. The lamellar armor of the guy on the right is nice, as is his belt. I even like their beards and headgear.

In the texture file is fine. Extra props are extra draw calls.

Carthaginian Standard Bearer (might be used for Battalions, if @Freagarach makes them possible. ). A couple of potential positions. Right flank or center.

You really don't like props do you? I see them in a lot of references. Figured it'd be alright if a hero had them.

@wackyserious Ateas

@wackyserious Some good ones:

Despite some disagreements above, this would actually be more dynamic method, because then you'd be able to have certain units give 0 regen when garrisoned. For instance, Women or Siege Engines.

Honestly, I would like the option to state in the aura file whether it is active always, when garrisoned, or when notgarrisoned. Many hero auras can be fixed with this option.

Ehhh, for Athens and Sparta they were pretty suss. For Persians there was some disputed historical justification for them.

Is this diff all there is to how I see ranching and corralling* working? Of course not, but it gets the concept rolling and in itself is a fine addition. *I would actually like to see Sheep/Goats/Pigs/Cattle scattered around the map as Gaia units that scouts can capture. This is similar to AOE games. The difference is, with this patch you have the choice of slaughtering this free captured food immediately or corralling them for a trickle of long-term food (like a relic). We don't have AOE-style animal capturing yet, so the next best thing is the animal training aspect of the Corral and then giving the player the choice of slaughtering or corralling.

I think the main issue with that, was that it was originally only going to give you different heroes and champions, and that was it. If it were to be designed today, I think the choice would be at the beginning. Leaving it until City Phase makes the "Hellenes" for example feel very generic, until you pick "Macedonians" in City phase and get Pikeman and Spear Cav champions. You lose out on all the Macedonian flavor in the early phases. No Thessalians. No Hypaspist champions. No Thracians. No unique architectural elements. No unique techs (until the very end). It wasn't a bad idea for its time, but we know so much more now about how these factions were unique (specifically militarily, when talking about the Greek civs). The original design had no Seleucids and their awesome War Elephants. The original design had no Ptolemaic Egyptians with their awesome architecture and mix of ethnicities. I could see something where you choose your "Civilization" in game setup. So, "Greeks" for example or "Successor States" or "Romans" or "Celts" or "Nomads", and then when the match starts you get a popup where you choose the "Faction" from that Civilization. So, Greeks -> Athenians, Spartans, Thebans. Successor States -> Macedonians, Seleucids, Ptolemies. Romans -> Republic, Principate, Dominate. Celts -> Gauls, Britons, Celtiberians. Nomads -> Scythians, Xiongnu, Huns. That way, your enemies know what Civilization you chose, but not which Faction until they scout you.

The story of Seleucus is in my list of screenplay ideas. Han Chinese are a very large and extremely influential civilization. Scythians and Xiongnu are civilizations that span the breadth of Asia and link East with West. They'd also add all-new gameplay possibilities. Honestly, Scythians and Xiongnu would probably be refreshing to a lot of people (even if hard to balance; but again, there's no rule to state you'd have to allow them in your rated multiplayer matches [we can can include a Random/Settle Civilizations option that excludes nomads, see:DE]; also, we could surprise ourselves and actually balance them fairly well, we don't know yet). That's fine. I just think 1 or more new civs are eventually going to be added. You'll probably enjoy them even if they don't fit your theme*. * Civs like Zapotecs and Maya and Olmecs (Mesoamericans, essentially) don't fit at all, we can agree on that. I still would like to see them as some kind of "official expansion" or mod in the download section eventually (perhaps as part of an Alpha release; a kind of "content" pack released in parallel).

Mauryas ended who? Kushites what? Spartans are largely a backwater, insular city state, but they're included because they are famous and fun and add diversity. Mauryas included because they are awesome and add diversity, but had zero contact with Rome. Kushites had a few minor border wars with Rome, but are included to add fun and diversity to the civ roster. Han could be included because "If the Chinese and Romans ever fought, who would win?!?!" is a super common what-if scenario people talk about. Plus they add diversity to the roster and the opportunity for new gameplay.

Indeed! If volunteer developers enjoy building new civs instead of doing other things, more power to them!

Exact same code.