Jump to content

wowgetoffyourcellphone

0 A.D. Art Team
  • Posts

    10.217
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    491

Posts posted by wowgetoffyourcellphone

  1. 4 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    Oh thanks God...

    So I can still made my own slaves and mercenaries?

    Yeah, I recently implemented the slave economy to all civs. There are Male Citizens and Female Citizens, who build economic and civic buildings, and who have a Slave Ownership aura which boosts: Male and Female Slaves, who are available to train after building a Market.

     

    So...

    Male Citizen - Trained at the Civic Center, builds economic and civic buildings, mediocre at gathering resources. Has Slave Ownership aura.

    Female Citizen - Trained at Houses after building 5/10 houses, builds economic and civic buildings, mediocre at gathering resources. Has Slave Ownership and Inspiration auras.

     

    Male Slave - Trained at the Storehouse after building a Market. Cannot build, but gathers resources very well, especially when within the Slave Ownership aura.

    Female Slave - Trained at the Farmstead after building a Market. Cannot build, but gathers resources very well, especially when within the Slave Ownership aura.

     

    I would like to combine the male and female variations into one unit each, Citizen and Slave, to make things simpler. This is basically the same functionality that Age of Kings had back in 1999 with its male and female villagers. I can do this visually with actor variations, but their selection sounds, specifically their voices will not be correct. I asked some WFG developers about allowing entities to have more than 1 gender and I was advised to submit a patch. lol, I guess it'll never happen then!

    • Like 1
  2. 45 minutes ago, av93 said:

    What you would do for the gameplay, having in mind that it's a remake?

    Delenda Est, but with ages instead of phases. :) Add battalions for soldiers. Add AOE3/AOEO home cities. Add age-up choices ala AOM. Have "god powers" but slightly more mundane, call them "Commandments" or something, just boosts or policies that affect gameplay. Have an incredibly well-written and historical campaign for "Europe", "Africa", and "The East."

     

    Basically, harness the entire "Age" canon, and then include some extra innovations.

  3. 1 hour ago, wackyserious said:

    Yeah, looking at the chart that you gathered in the reference thread.

    I really like helmet 12

    Helmet+development.jpg

    12 is the classic Corinthian helmet that we all know and love, 6th and 5th century. 16 is a more refined version for better hearing, which I really like, 5th and early 4th centuries. It's my favorite Corinthian variation. Notice how the face and cheek pieces of the helmet have a general taper down.

    #20 is an excellent example of a Thracian-style helmet, used across the Hellenistic world in the 4th and 3rd centuries. Great for pikemen, mercenary hoplites, and maybe even elite archers.

  4. 6 hours ago, stanislas69 said:

    @LordGood @wowgetoffyourcellphone @wackyserious

    Here are all the files, ready to use.
    To see the new helmets in atlas go to actors (all) and type  helmets (Illyrian hasn't been remade yet)
    All helmets are made to be on the head prop point, if you need to be able to put it on the helmet prop point, I can try, but I'm not sure how much I should tweak them.
    If you feel like editing some textures, go ahead.

    Notice the improved armor texture, I'll commit it sooner or later.

    screenshot0157.png

    new_helmets.7z

    The textures are much smoother and much improved. They look like nice smooth metal helmets now.

     

    Critiques:

    - Corinthian helmet cheek pieces look a little "broad" to me. I think the overall face of the helmet should taper more, and the eye holes should be smaller.

    - The "Thracian Cap" helmets are confusing to me. They may or may not be accurate, I don't know. Maybe I just think they're ugly in general. lol

    - Some of the helmets have cheek pieces that are modeled to be more like ear muffs. ;) Maybe revisit the geometry of those.

  5. 20 hours ago, Sundiata said:

    Yes! Perhaps civ's should be tied to the geographic regions where their capital region is located, so you'd have:

    • Europa: Rome, Athens, Sparta, Macedon, Iberia, Gaul, Britannia  
    • Asia Minor: Persia, Seleucid Empire
    • Asia Mayor: Mauryan Empire, Han Chinese, Xiognu (wink, wink)
    • Africa: Carthage, Ptolemaic Egypt, Kush (wink, wink)

    Exactly, and you can be as granular as you want. You can have Europe as a region and then also Italy, Aegean, Mediterranean, Gallia, etc. as more regions. And any given civ can be in any number of regions, especially the big empires. It's all very possible and already in DE's civ.jsons in case @s0600204's patch is ever committed. 

    • Like 1
  6. 38 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

    We really need this:

     

     

    Your mockup has my mouth watering... Any chance you could make this a reality. It would really jazz up the civilization selection. Part of a larger interface update for the next release, it's necessary... 

    While the mockup is sexier, the patch is actually more functional, what with the regions and cultures functionality. Would be nice to combine the look of the mockup with the functionality of the patch.

    • Like 2
  7. 26 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

    I'm sorry, but I thought formations are broken? In my experience, putting units in formation right now is like sending lambs to the slaughter. The point of units moving at the speed of the slowest unit in a selection, is to make them less vulnerable, not more...

    The key is to just implement the hard battalion system. Voila. ;)

×
×
  • Create New...