wowgetoffyourcellphone

I know development continue for core game, so this is not critique of development. Do not take it that way. My question is if it is better to wait on making mods for this game. Right now because of all the changes probably 50% of my modding time is fixing thing to be compatible with new core game changes. I feel like I am wasting my time. If I had critique of official team it would be to ask why they put the effort to support modding so early in the development. But can't undo that of courese, lol. I don't post this to discourage, but I think modder need to understand what thy are getting into. Stick with graphical mods for now if you do not want to spend a LOT of time keeping track of game changes and monkeying around in Notepad++. Just one commit from core team can set you back a hour or more.

Depends on what kind of map you are talk about. For Skirmish maps, King of the Hill skirmish object can be place in most skirm maps by designer. But yeah, I would like to see Skirmish map be able to have multiple victory condition possible set by the designer in Atlas. Maybe even extend this to allow true and false and recommend. So, can choose recommended victory conditions, victory conditions that are allowable, but map not specifically designed for, and then victory condition it specifically does not allow. But maybe this is complicaed. I would like to see this be a wonder of the world, one of the 7 wonders. If it is desert map this wonder is the Hanging Gardens of Babylon (the Persian wonder is change to Gate of All Nations, I can't wait to see this, fam). If it is a temeperate map, this wonder is the Stonehenge (Britons get the White Horse of Uffington to replace). If it is a Greek map, it can be the Colossus of Rhodes (this can look really awesome). Egypt map? The Great Sphinx. Capture this wonder for X minutes and you are the king of the hill. Game can add cool structure from history to the game this way that you won't find with the current available civs. So, the Temple of Jerusalem can be one. Temple of Artemis.Thing like these.

IMHO, commit the VisibleGarrisonAllowedClass patch. Differentiate siege weapon (bolt shooter vs. catapult) by allow bolt shooters to show up on deck of ships and on fortress and towers. Catapult relegate to anti-building role, while bolt shooters have role of augmenting other thing. Maybe have upgrade for heavy warship to allow catapult to show up on deck (just 1, in front).

I do not think is the same bug.

Also can tell very much when there are many in a forest. Looks good. Early autumn.

Oh! Glad I could be of some help!

A good thing AOC had was the onagers would cease auto-fire if too any friendly unit in kill zone.

Ok, I think I am have r18373. I just synced local mod modification I was using last match to Github. Attach is the command.txt. commands.txt

I just tried me+1 AI vs. 2 AIs. All 3 AI, even my ally, put tower toward the north. I do not expect you to support my mod. But maybe there is something going on here that interest you.

Range of tower and fortress is a problem. Catapults (and heavy warships) should simply outrange the towers and foreesses. Would that help you? Also, yeah, heavy warship should have higehr base attack. I was think of going the Age of Empire way and making the ships a upgrade procession: Light -> Medium -> Heavy

It is the wooden tower actor, but Defense Tower template. It available in Village Phase. Come Town Phase, player can upgrde it to stone towers.

You are right. Does not happen in vanilla game. AI maybe confuse about a few things in mod that are different from vanilla: 1. There is only 1 type of defense tower (like in past alpha). 2. Number of defense tower limit increase with each new civic center. Those are the main difference.

Hi, I like this. Here's you can use thise I made for you if you like it. Here is screenshot:

Hi. So in my mod I remove the "wooden defense tower" and just have one defense tower like in earlier alpha. But, it starts out as wood, and in Town Phase (City Phase for Celts) player can upgrade the wooden defense tower to stone defense tower. This use actor replace code in tech. Everything works great except two things -- 1 (most impoertant problem), in the fog of war the stone towers revert back to original wooden tower actor, and 2, when building a new stone tower what rises from the ground is the old wooden actor. Here is the tech: { "genericName": "Stone Towers", "description": ".", "cost": {"food": 0, "wood": 0, "stone": 500, "metal": 0}, "requirements": {"tech": "phase_town"}, "requirementsTooltip": "Unlocked in Town Phase.", "icon": "stone_towers.png", "researchTime": 40, "tooltip": "Upgrade wooden defense towers to stone defense towers. +100% health, +100 stone cost. Unlocks Oxybeles Towers.", "modifications": [ {"value": "Cost/Resources/stone", "add": 100}, {"value": "Health/Max", "multiply": 2}, {"value": "VisualActor/Actor", "replace": "structures/hellenes/scout_tower.xml"} ], "affects": ["DefenseTower"], "soundComplete": "interface/alarm/alarm_upgradearmory.xml" } If you guys are going to show Civic Centers upgrading visual actor with phases, then this is something that should be fix, since that feature will probably use the same or similar kind of tech modification (unless you go really weird and do some kind of entity promotion).

I'll make a new thread for this. Original post was abou AIs tower place to the North.

The defense tower mod works good, except the actor switching does not stay permanent in the fog of war for some reason (this might have a ticket already, if not needs one).

Hi guys. AI is back to its old trick of putting all defense tower toward top of map:

Probably should not allow, at least in multiplayer and single campaign. But in singleplayer match vs. ai I don't see a problem. But to answer your question there is no config option to turn off distance fog that I can see in default.cfg*, but there may be a developer hack?

Formations are no use if the soldiers don't stay in them and start running around like chicken.

This is true. But if the current team have different opinion, that is fine too. The current team does not have to do what the team back in 2005 wanted to be done for example. But if the cureent team does not believe in a hard formation concept, then the vision should be modified. If some want it and some don't want it, then it would be cool to have in the engine and then some mods can have them and the vanilla game can have soft formations. If vanilla game just go with soft formation, then just get rid of wedges and flank formations and all that. Just have the simple boxy/line like in Age of Mythology. If the soldier do not stay in formation and fight and die in formation, then there is no use for wedges and phalanxes and all that. Just get rid of all that and simplify. But if you do want formation to be integral to combat, then don't go halfway. That's all I am say. A note about hard formation and what I mean by not going halfway:

If you guy s do not make the formations fundamental to the combat, then yes guys, you are doomed to failure. If there is not believe in the concept then why spend the effort to try to implement it? Srs questions. I have never seen 1 team member with strong voice say they like the concept. Are you implement it for mods? If that's true it is much appreciated, but in the end, for Vanilla game, you have to have a strong unified vision for the game's combat. Either you go all in with the formations and make them the core of the combat, or you just give soldiers a simple boxy/line formation (so they don't look completely unorganized) that they break out of all the time and be done with it.

So, unit portrait in match GUI is presented in 128x128?

Hmm, maybe. Biut will resizing (scale down) for match GUI cause artifact or other undesired thing (like look smudgy)?

Maybe a page in game mod selector that load a page that have available mods with up/down votes and comments.

I think wing should bend upward during down stroke (opposite of what you have). Just muy opinion.