wowgetoffyourcellphone

Truly, an impressive warrior.

Wouldn't more harmonious colors make it easier to incorporate player color? Or at least help make the player color stand out.

1. The skybox proportions are also wrong if you look at it. Looks like a pizza box. The sides are squished, compressing the texture. 2. Also, the skybox doesn't seem to move upward with the average height of the map, so that the "ceiling" of the skybox by default is very very close to the terrain on the default blank map in Atlas. This causes some problems, notably with water reflection of the sky on user-created maps. The solution to that particular problem is to lower the default height of the blank map to something like height="2048". As always, see Delenda Est for this viable and easy solution.

I have complained about the skybox for a long time. Perhaps there is a ticket.

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/20389 @mimo Looks like the structures are: {civ}_barracks {civ}_elephant_stables {civ}_range {civ}_stable No 's' {civ}_workshop No 'siege' [mace's siege workshop needs renamed]

The unit texture sizing needs changed to 1x2. That way the legs/skirts may extend naturally downward. Then the top part can be for both arms. This way, there can be asymmetry in the texture. For instance, Romans of the Punic Wars only wore a greave on one leg, not both. Currently, there's no way to do this in the texture. If we do as I say, this asymmetry can properly be addresed, and issues that you bring up in this thread can be solved as well. It would also solve the long skirt problem for females as well as males. But that's a lot of textures to fix/change. Perhaps a script can be written to rearrange the existing textures in batches. Then all the artists have to do is a bit of cleanup.

This is a problem with Alpha 23, not Delenda Est. I tested it in Alpha 23 and still got this. Public mod only, Delenda Est disabled. So, I tested it with the Alpha 22 release and got no visual error. Only new skeleton in A23 over A22 is the target marker.

I think the point was, and I'm just guessing, that it would be more profitable for the player to build 5 farms, each with a worker, than to stock 1 farm with 5 workers, given that the need for food is greater than the need for the wood to build the farms.

Thank god. lol

LordGood is right.

As far as realism goes, yeah slings and arrows doing damage against a barracks is pretty silly. But as a gameplay abstraction I don't mind arrows and lead bullets doing some damage. 99% pierce armor is fine with me. Still takes a darn long time for a bunch of slingers to take down a barracks at that level of pierce armor, as long as slingers don't have crush attack; significantly longer than it takes the same number of spearmen or swordsmen. Ima do some tests, brb. I could do it with maths, but fighting things out in Atlas is so much more fun! EDIT: In Delenda Est, 30 slingers of mixed rank, representing a likely force of slingers raised by a player, it took them 4 minutes to take down a barracks! lol The barracks had 96% pierce armor. This is okay to me. lol By stats alone, it would take them 12 minutes to take down a fortress, but in reality they never would because they would be killed by the arrows shot by the fortress, as the fortress outranges them, rightly so.

There's no shame in trying something out to see if it works. Isn't that one of the things an alpha is good for? If it works, keep it. If it doesn't, modify or remove it and try something else.

Rorarii

Rorarius, you mean?

Yeah, old school v0.0.0.1 0 A.D. lol

In what way? Maybe farm fields would be constant map objects and the player claims a group of fields by building a farmstead on a farmstead slot.

Yes, I think it would be cool to be able to build a Storehouse on a slot and claim a gold mine for your civilization. Stuff like that.

I thought the same way as you until I looked the words "stables" and "stable" up. Stable is not synonymous with stall. So, Stables doesn't mean a group a of stalls in one building, Stable does. Stables means multiple Stable buildings. Barracks is different, apparently.

Yep, I call it "slotting."

Finally some shield props. Nice.

LOL I like the running commentary

I know what Ima do for DE. Base game can flail. Basically, I am going to try to come up with at least 2 units for each of these buildings, except Elephant Stable, for each civ. If I can't come up with at least 2 units for each, then I'll just throw the extra 1 into the barracks or make it the Civic Center unit, depending on context. To emphasize that each civ has its own military focus I will do something like this: Since the Persians have an archer and cavalry focus, I will include the promotion techs for each ranged unit at the Archery Range and for each Cavalry unit in the Cavalry Stable. The Barracks will include no promotion techs, few techs at all really. Romans, they get a bunch of Barracks techs, but no Archery Range and Cavalry Stable techs. You can go on down the list and see how easy it would be to allow, say, the Athenians to have a generic Greek Archer, aka Toxotes, and give them access to that type of unit, but clearly the upgrades and promotion lines will be heavily given to the melee infantry units at the Barracks, mainly to Hoplites. Actually, I'm going to make the Gymnaseion the Athenian Barracks, but that's beside the point.

I should have kept my mouth shut, since I actually really like the current Persian temple.