Jump to content

fatherbushido

WFG Retired
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1.148

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Posts posted by fatherbushido

  2. Path of techs to upgrade units

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    While reading old irc logs from 2010-2011, I read ideas about having different path of "upgrading" soldiers depending of the civ.

    I don't quote but that idea (from "Mythos") was:

    for example:

    - cart upgrades by ethnicity

    - pers upgrades Infantry and Cavalry separately

    - greek upgrade by unit type (spearmen, javeliners, ...)

    - celt, iber upgrade by weapons (sword, spear, ...)

    There are things like that in DE mod and there was also in WFG 0ad before almost all was flatten in the blacksmith.

    Let's talk.

    • Like 2

  6. Special units and so on

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by fatherbushido

    "stoas units"

    from left to right Thureophoros, Thorakites and Thacian "Black Cloak" armed with the Rhomphaia.

    screenshot0408.thumb.png.49c7e9c3d050d0a82e75e7fdef23be19.png

     

    Thureophoros

    from left to right

    "Mercenary champions" from stoas and basic, advanced, elite ptol mercenaries javelinist.screenshot0409.thumb.png.00ab6f8b09487c7de72bfdd1af77d8a2.png

     

    Thacian "Black Cloak" rhomphaia men

    from left to right

    "Mercenary champions" from stoas and basic, advanced, elite seleucids mercenaries "swordmen"

    screenshot0410.thumb.png.b68a9962b3fb35c8fb2c0d57ac7a1c15.png

     

     

  7. Special buildings and so on

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by fatherbushido
    precisions

    Yeah we kinda agree, that's what classes are for.

    But there is a difference between the  "first wave" of special buildings (the ones in design docs) and the "second wave" (the ones used in the DE manner - placed on the map and giving a bonus).

    But well we can first focus on the above stoas?

    Why those models? History? Wrong "Royal" name? Purpose? ...

    • Like 1

  11. Special units and so on

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    I'll try to be short and so not comprehensive.

    I open a related topic: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/25503-special-buildings-and-so-on/

    At some point there were beautiful units introduced. They were possibly introduced as experience, for art experiment, for special purpose or whatever.

    Among them some stay in the atlas,

    some other were moved to some maps in special already placed building (the famous Thracian black cloaks https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/16768-alpha-xi-laconia-is-it-winnable/&tab=comments#comment-256009 leading sometimes to questions https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/18586-unit-recruitment/&tab=comments#comment-290393)

    and some were finally moved to the production queue list:

    - black_cloak, thureophoros, thorakites for spart, athen and mace

    - kardakes_hoplite, kardakes_skirmisher

    (I won't speak of issues with templates organization and things like that but) it seems that the design was not finished nor consistent.

    For example:

    - some are recruitable in a non military building

    - they are designed as champion mercenary (that's what I conclude) and sometimes trainable in phase 2, well that led to interesting things in games. Is that a good idea?

    - Are those 3 units black_cloak, thureophoros, thorakites really consistent?

    - The kardakes are mercenary champions and noted as such in the persian hall tooltip https://trac.wildfiregames.com/browser/ps/trunk/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/structures/pers_hall.xml but iirc there weren't mercenaries at all. So what?

    [...]

    ---

    Now let's talk!

     

     

     

  12. Special buildings and so on

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by fatherbushido
    added the link

    I'll try to be short and so not comprehensive.

    I open a related topic: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/25504-special-units-and-so-on/

    1) Special structures in "normal game"

    A long time ago it was designed to have generic buildings but also civ specific special buildings. It's still present in design docs, fe: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Civ%3A_Athenians#SPECIALSTRUCTURES.

    I have nothing to add from the gameplay or the art point of view.

    (From templates organization point of view, it's not always clear: they first inherited from the structure_special templates, then it went in all directions.)

    2) Special structures already placed (in all or in some maps)

    Then came other such buildings. One example is "stoa" https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/8341/

    It seems the first intention was to put it in some scenario maps or perhaps all maps.

    See those beautiful screenshots https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/13519-arcadia-ii/&do=findComment&comment=210809

    There was the longhouse in the same spirit https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/12669-simulation-progress/page/14/&tab=comments#comment-211206

    There were other ideas the same spirit https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/14955-the-alpha-7-preview-thread/&tab=comments#comment-222741

    If I am not wrong, in the DE mod there was farther exploration of those ideas.

    (From templates organization point of view, I always wondered where those buildings should take place and how they should fit in inheritance tree.)

    3) Mismatch and so on

    At a point where there were nothing really new, wfg moved some of those "atlas only" buildings to builder list.

    https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/20289-atlas-only-structures/&tab=comments#comment-311954

    and commited in https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/18024

    I won't comment history. It was a choice at a specific point in time.

    4) Questions

    Stoa: there are still two stoa templates in the game. The one buildable by all civ in the game is called "royal stoa" which seems not accurate. https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/21570-royal-stoa/&tab=comments#comment-325182

    Moreover it is used on a military purpose. Shouldn't it be use as a civic or economic purpose?

    [...]

    --

    Let's talk now.

    • Like 3

  17. Structure range

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    13 minutes ago, Nescio said:

    Doesn't sound too bad.

    BuildingAI fires in any direction and can have multiple arrows, UnitAI attacks only forward, or are there other differences?

    It's completely different.

    UnitAI places unit at range (so taking into account obstruction of the target) (high cost).

    BuildingAI do a range query from center to center and fire all things in that range (low cost).

  18. Structure range

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by fatherbushido

    10 minutes ago, nani said:

    Could you describe the technical difference ( is obstruction shape a simplification of the shape?)

    Obstruction shapes are used by the pathfinder. (If I am not wrong, they are only squares and moving units are just points (but they add their radius - clearance - to every obstruction)). So in that current problem it is used when UnitAI places a unit "at range".

    Footprints are mainly used for selection rings but also, in our case, for detecting attack collision. (They can be circular or rectangular.)

    (Then there is a difference for attacks performed by BuildingAI and the ones performed by UnitAI.)

    • Like 2

  21. How to modify 0 A.D.?

    in Tutorials & Guides

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Nescio said:

    Yes, I assumed so; but what's the result exactly? E.g. do the following give effectively different results?

    • 80 max range + 0 elevation bonus
    • 40 max range + 40 elevation bonus
    • 0 max range + 80 elevation bonus

    The game is basically a 2D game.

    max range is the horizontal range.

    elevation bonus is added to the height of the launcher.

    Assuming parabolic trajectory, there is an elegant result giving the new range (the hypothenuse of the new triangle - not the horizontal range). From that one you get the new horizontal range.

    There are some more details to add but I guess that is enough.

    1 hour ago, Nescio said:

    By the way, the range visualization seems to ignore the elevation bonus; is that intentional?

    I don't know, I didn't follow those commits.

  25. some little suggestions

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    22 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

    'A bit too small' sounds much too weak for me. The ships are ridiculously oversized and frequently can't reach spots I really think they should be able to. 

    Agree. Oversized for the maps (but not for units).

    22 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

    One example where ship size and map/world size totally don't match is 'Mediterranean'; the size of the mare nostrum is ok for one or two fishing boats, but a warship can't reach the Adriatic Sea or the Levant or pass the Strait of Gibraltar. 

    Ah ah I like that example because there are those maps (red sea and mediterranean) with a completely different scale. (That's personal taste, but they really don't fit with the other maps - but why not... - I played them sometimes).

    22 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

    And while pathfinding is a general issue, I feel ships manage to be the dumbest moving units of all. And single ships are bad enough, but if you have two that are crossing paths or want to go by each other... :banger:

    Ships have indeed their own motion/pathfinding issues (like planes have their own motion/pathfiniding issues).

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...