wowgetoffyourcellphone

Ptolemies and Carthaginians are our main "mercenary" civs. To pay for their large number of mercenaries, I propose these solutions: Carthaginians were consummate traders and merchants. This mercantile empire helped them hire vast numbers of expensive mercenaries. A significant trading bonus in metal, over land and sea (above and beyond their "regular" trading bonus). Ptolemaic Egypt had a large surplus of food and would sell this surplus to international buyers (to Rome is a famous, but not the only, example). A significant bonus in bartering food to metal. A bonus in receiving metal tribute from allies.

My opinion: Mercenaries should not need any training. They are hired, not trained, fully ready for campaign. Effect: Mercenaries train instantly or very fast (5 seconds or less). Part of a Mercenary's compensation is plunder, that sweet sweet loot they can send back to their families in Bumfuq Arcadia. Effect: The <Looter> component is disabled. Mercenaries are usually already experienced at war (or garrison duty at least). Effect: Most mercenaries train at Advanced rank. Some (Balearic Slinger, for example) train at Elite rank, with additional cost. Mercenaries are paid a wage and buy their own provisions. Effect: All mercs cost Metal and only Metal ("Coin" in Delenda Est was designed for this purpose). Cavalry mercs cost more. Hiring Mercenaries is expensive, and kings had to heavily tax their subjects in order to afford large numbers of mercenaries. Effect: A new tech at the Market, "War Taxes", gives the player a trickle of Metal from every Citizen and Trader, but reduces their gather rates.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/transcoded/5/53/Persepolis%2C_Hauptstadt_Persiens_(CC_BY-SA_4.0).webm/Persepolis%2C_Hauptstadt_Persiens_(CC_BY-SA_4.0).webm.480p.webm

Indeed. Games have restrictions. These help define the parameters of the game. lol

Fair questions, but not insurmountable problems. Tutorial, tooltips, simple in-game prompts.

I just bring up the problem, because I don't think it's been discussed. How do we want forests to work?

I think we need to increase the tree obstruction size so that we can truly make them impassable, or else just get rid of tree obstructions altogether. Right now, you got the worst of all worlds: Not only do units have to bump around trees affecting pathfinding, they also block building construction an make base building annoying. Also, currently it is nearly impossible to make an impassable forest without using a too many trees (stumps side by side to make a all). Example: The new Hercynian Forest map I'm making for A25. You can see that I am using tons and tons of trees, yet here soldiers can walk right through with no problem. Using any more trees to make it impassable would severely impact performance even on my god-tier laptop. Now, in Delenda Est this is expected behavior, because I've removed all obstruction from trees (you can even build over them), and furthermore I've created "Forest Grove" objects that make units who walk through move 50% slower (and fight 50% worse). That's fine for Delenda Est, but I think Empires Ascendant wants the trees to act like in Age of Empires. Right now, they don't. Even if I increase the obstruction size from w=1.6 and d=1.6 to w=6 and d=6, units still find paths through the forest. This obstruction size also affects the gathering distance of workers. So, I am currently at an impasse.

Any progress, bro?

Hercynian Forest https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Hercynian_Forest

Using the Upgrade feature, you could toggle between infantry and cavalry versions of the hero (see Delenda Est). Unfortunately, no dismount/mount animation yet, but the feature works reasonably well.

I tweaked him a little bit more for Delenda Est to look like this:

Surely it would be a very simple rig? It's more like 280.

Him in-game (Empires Ascendant).

Yeah, he has an armor variation ith the big gorgon face on it. In DE, I believe I removed that variation and used it elsewhere.

If you think bankers actually support socialism, then you've lost the plot. BUT, THIS ISN'T THE FORUM OR THREAD FOR THIS DISCUSSION.

It's not the words themselves that need banned. It's when the content of the words are being used to belittle or attack other players (regardless of ideology). But as a democratic socialist myself, I am very unlikely to be holding a flame war against our economic oppressors on the 0 A.D. multi-player chat.

I believe that is a pre-made animation.

In gaul/champion_cavalry_swordsman These two sections are wrong: <Run> <Speed>21.0</Speed> </Run> <Attack> <Melee> <Hack>2.0</Hack> <Pierce>0.0</Pierce> <Crush>25.0</Crush> </Melee> </Attack> Run speed is now a multiplier of walk speed ( see your file template_unit_champion_cavalry.xml as an example of it done right) Attack needs <Damage> inside the melee component. Your file template_unit_champion_cavalry_swordsman does this right.

I like this out-of-the-box thinking. Finally, an idea that's never been suggested before.

10 years from now, who knows?

Post the template file for us

It's Alpha 23 or nuthin.

He does have that cuirass.

This is neat. I like it a lot. Pretty cool too. Too bad about the farmland getting put inside forests.