wowgetoffyourcellphone

I think I put it there because, frankly, it doesn't make sense in the Forge. It's not a weapon or armor upgrade, it's a training thing. Also, put it there as a differentiator, but it's a small change so I'm not wed to it. But for real, maybe investigate moving Archery Training to the Barracks for every archer civ.

I can't put my finger on it, but EA's version of mercenaries feels feature-incomplete to me.

Centurions added to the game for the Romans: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/27400

The Scythians & Xiongnu would play fairly different from the Romans and everyone else, assuming they act anything like their counterparts in DE. @LetswaveaBook

I agree. Ships should just be good from the get go. I understand the original idea. There would be a lot fewer ships and then you'd get to micro them by putting things (archers, catapults, et al.) on deck, similar to that Sparta game from like 15 years ago ( https://store.steampowered.com/app/1693250/Ancient_Wars_Sparta_Definitive_Edition/ ). But I think folks want more than 5 ships. And people only have a limited APM available in their brains and fingers.

0 A.D. is a fictional time, so gives the game license to mix and match civilization encounters. I also agree that Rome can eventually be depicted in various periods. It's already possible to limit the number of trained heroes to 3, but offer a choice of more than 3. It just takes agreement to make this happen.

It is very easy to make a separate civ, since it already exists in DE. Mainly because the army and navy of the Principate is very different from the Mid-Republic. It's not just the matter of unlocking a couple new champions or something. The Principate no longer has "citizen-soldiers" in the way depicted in the game. The army composition is different and all of the armor and textures are different. The navy of the Principate no longer used quinqueremes, but light warships called Liburna, analogous to biremes.

+1

Macedonians "Naval Arms Race" Unlock the Hexeres heavy warship for Macedon

The Nomads had iron weapons and iron armor, just like their contemporaries, and light and heavy cavalry. Mayas and Zapotecs didn't have any of that, you're right.

Tutorial update:

"Live to fight another day..."

The only thing that would be historically difficult for us to depict is the "Fast Fire Ship," which seems to be based on the much later "Greek Fire" siphon-equipped Byzantine warships and would be very anachronistic. The others can be justified for Mediterranean civs. Difficult for Celts/Land-based civs.

I'm not opposed to it. And let's keep in mind that just because we replace Iphicrates with someone else (Miltiades, Aristides, Alcibiades) it doesn't mean we still can't have Iphicrates in the editor or in a campaign.

While it may not be worthwhile to, say, have 2 Macedonian civs (Argead and Antigonid) or 2 Spartan civs (Classical and Hellenistic), I think Rome would be the one exception to this. The Republican era was very different from the Principate era, which itself was different from the Dominate era. Rome as a polity lasted so long it could be worthwhile to put the effort into depicting these 3 eras separately. Perhaps a special feature of the Roman civ could be this ability to choose "eras." At the start of the match playing as the Romans, the player is given the choice of which era they wish to play (Republican, Triumvirate, Principate, Dominate) which then alters unit roster, techs, buildings, etc. to suit this choice. Or... just have 3 separate civs and have a random "Romans" group in game setup.

Archaeologists are making discoveries every year, but unfortunately we have scant information on Amazonian civilizations beyond LiDAR imagery.

There seems to be a very strong trend in the poll results.

Can add +20% cost to the ranged tech and see how that feels.

Be more specific? Just curious wym.

Yeah, same problem with the Mauryas in Delenda Est. I've been meaning to come up with some kind of caste or peasant system for those civs without thralls/slaves, but I've spent time on other things. Any ideas?

I agree with the poll. But if the Council of 0 A.D. Enthusiasts, plus @Stan` @Freagarach @wraitii et al. wanted to expand the scope a bit to add the Pre-Classical Maya, then I'd be all for it. @Lopess and @Duileoga are making a good mod for them. I agree. I just added the Syracusans to the poll because they are quite advanced in DE and are kinda cool/a bit different. Nomads, Germans, etc. before any new Greekish civs for sure. Gotta expand that cultural base of the game for that sweet sweet variety.

I agree, honestly. It would be nice to be able to depict the civs at different eras. The Punic Wars were a high point (and low point) for Rome, full of drama that's not often depicted, which is why that particular period was chosen. But let's say at the start of a match you choose a hero, as in Delenda Est, we could swap out units and technologies and even buildings based on that choice. Choose Julius Caesar or Pompey and now your unit roster is of the "Marian Reforms" legion instead of the Polybian legion you'd get if you chose Marcellus or Scipio. The buildings wouldn't need to look different, but the unit roster would. It's possible, DE does it (as mentioned). Back to new civs now though.

Thing is, the reason you can't train Julius Caesar is precisely because of the time restriction. JC was born 100 years after the final Punic War and the Romans in the game are depicted in the Punic Wars era. That would be my ultimate goal, yes. "0 A.D." is the game/engine, while "Empires Ascendant" is an era. It would just happen naturally if we continue to add civs and the only work needed with be to write the UI for selecting eras.

At first due to the thumbnail image I thought it was Majorcete's old playthru, but I see it is only 2 days old. Nice. Make sure to give us your impression of the game once you try it!