Palaxin
-
Posts
217 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Palaxin
-
-
Yggdrasil if there was something Norse related which I do not expect...
EDIT: since it's a tree we may also use it if a substantial amount of new flora was added
-
1
-
-
-
20 hours ago, DanW58 said:
Depict the results. Health could be depicted by blood dripping. Armor by loss of chunks of it. Energy by the rate of attacks slowing down. Why are you showing these things as bars? But they disagreed with me, so I left.
If you are given enough information about how the game works that you can figure out what will happen in every situation, then what's the point of playing it? A game should mirror the uncertainties of life.
7 hours ago, DanW58 said:Exactly. And role is better depicted artistically than using words or numbers. Units with a lot of metal in the armor are visually and intuitively expected to take arrows with a grain of salt, but move more slowly.
However, this requires proper depiction of metal, which takes a bit of science to understand how just by using diffuse and specular colors. Assets currently in game make very poor use of color to distinguish metals from non-metals. Improving the texturing would go a long way to make "stats" easier to visualize.
I agree... 0 A.D. has been quite economic with visually representing game mechanics.
Which is understandable given the voluntary nature and limited manpower of the project. Imagine we would have a distinct building set for each phase for each civ (AoE style), that would be an insane amount of work for the very few people capable of doing it in the required quality.
However, a lot of effort has been put into visual details regarding historical accuracy (which has been a claimed goal of this project). Many units have several actors representing them (with several shield types, helmet types, clothing, ...).This is great from the historical perspective, but not from a gameplay perspective. Units are far more difficult to identify on a quick glance than in other games because of this variety and because of the details. Their role is not always clear and in some cases the amount of extra information is more overwhelming than helpful. Obviously there is a tradeoff. But I think there is still room for improvement.
I'd prefer a truly visual representation of unit stats without any text but icons instead. Use a minimal amount of numbers (if any) and prefer something like color shades (green - healthy, red - near death) or a bar split into a discrete amount of segments where you can only derive approximate values. An extensive description of the exact values (if still desired) belongs to an extra page which is not visible during normal gameplay.
Of course, representing the stats in the animations, with particles etc. would be very nice, but I have not seen much effort made into that direction (rather into depicting historically accurate details). So I don't expect big changes here...
10 hours ago, DanW58 said:There's a greater, cultural problem, where games are concerned, that this is a part of. Just as in politics, where some fanatical and loud minority can steer politics in a direction that disadvantages the vast majority of people, in gaming culture there's also one typical loud minority that drives developers to ruin games for the rest of us. This minority is the dedicated, full time, competitive online gamers, who typically no longer care for the story or the art, or even the sound quality or the graphics anymore (presumably they cared at the beginning); once they become advanced and start getting an online reputation, all they come to care about is winning, and to win they need to know how the game works down to points of health removed by each single use of a weapon given so many points of defensive armor...
Such people typically DEMAND stats and whatnot.
This just reminds me of League of Legends. I began to play it at the end of Season 2 (2012), there was a good amount of champions, of items. It was exciting to play around with conventional and ridiculous strategies. People were trying different things and had completely different approaches to the game. Most importantly, the had FUN. There was no perfect balance, but a new player could still find his way around after some games. There were quite some numbers, but the majority of them was easy to understand and could give you a rough feeling of strengths and weaknesses as well as the playstyle. There was already a competitive eSports scene, but it was not that present to the normal player.
However, more and more champions were added and each one had to be "interesting", so their abilites got more special, had more possible interactions. However, they were more difficult to master - presumably because the growing competitive scene needed something more interesting - and especially more difficult to understand. Read https://leagueoflegends.fandom.com/wiki/Aphelios as an example. Now there are more than 150 champions and for many of them you have to read several pages just to know their basic abilities. Then, actually, you have to continue with item builds, analyze different matchups, synergies, counters, know the metagame and their role... it gets endless and it changes with every patch (and actually that is wanted because even the professional players never get the possibility to find out the "perfect" strategy). I got annoyed by the game (and I know others as well) because it felt that the original, simple and clear playstyle which you could still see in some older champions was not wanted anymore by the game developer and the competitive scene. Older champions got updates and often were changed completely to "match" the new champions. The gameplay feeling of the early days is completely gone. Everything is optimized, maximized, polished, analyzed, broadcasted, streamed, ... Every streamer is praising himself how "broken" some champion is with whatever new "OP build"... see https://www.youtube.com/user/SirhcEz/videos as an example.
QuoteLeague of Legends is a highly competitive and complex game that has been so analyzed and dissected that any moment you spend wasting time typing or interacting with teammates or opponents in a manner that is not conducive to winning the game not only puts you at a disadvantage by 1) cutting virtual seconds away from focusing on playing game, but 2) by tilting the teammates who realize you are wasting energy typing rather than playing. Again, this dehumanizing element of League is a huge flaw of the game
(from "Why LoL brings out the worst in people with a "competitive" personality type", https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/ajoire/why_lol_brings_out_the_worst_in_people_with_a/)
It feels like competitiveness has reached every niche of the game. I have gotten tired of it.
Sorry, I hope this was not too much negativity. I just wanted to illustrate what 0 A.D. could learn from the mistakes of other games...
I still like 0 A.D. but it experiences the changes observable in other games to some degree, too. Still it is possible for everyone to propose changes and to engange in their implementation and that is very valuable.
Have a good day!
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
*I say this a lot because most things I would suggest I would have already put into my mod, so the mod becomes an easy example in discussions like these. If inclined, folks can go straight to the mod and test out exactly what I am suggesting.
Your mod is the first thing I want to try out when testing 0 A.D. in practice again. Unfortunately if I try something new, I do it thoroughly, and right now I see too many conflicts with my time allocation. I think if you can upgrade only 2 champs, they should receive a special bonus besides plain stats and visuals. E.g. inspiration or fear auras etc. Otherwise they will just survive with the hero and fight a bit longer than the rest in case of a lost battle (similar to Agis who is quite useless). These Olympic champions / bodyguards would be tier III champions in my systems, tier I being Spartiate and tier II being Hippeis.
11 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:My take is that there should be choices provided that they are meaningful ones and play to different possibilities during the timeframe in which they were represented. With Rome it might be a matter of trying to consider the demands of the plebeians over the senatorial elite. Carthage might be a matter of relying on foreign mercenaries or locals for its military.
I agree with impactful choices. Probably have one choice for every phase advance (and a bonus choice when finishing a wonder) which potentially affects multiple units and/or technologies.
-
1
-
-
@Nescio provides the Spartans with a champion hoplite as a starting unit in D3412. A good first step!
18 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:I think that there could be a middle ground. Units can improve through technologies and the like, and what might have served as a powerful village phase unit could be fairly average by comparison in the city phase.
I think a good middle ground could be:
- 1 free champion in village phase (see patch above)
- champion training in town phase with regular champion stats
- heavy upgrade technologies and auras in city phase
If that would make them too strong, they should be tweaked at other places, e.g. economy, Skiritai, ...
18 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:The one thing that I'd say should be key to design of this sort is to remember that 'the rule of cool'>'balance.' There should be an aim to always make things feel overpowered compared to vice-versa.
Exactly what I had in mind. Spartan hoplites feel good but not overpowered really. E.g. Macedonians have a similar strong infantry unit. If they could 1v2 other champions, they would feel so, even if they actually were not from an overall perspetive (keeping costs, train time, unit restrictions, late availability, low speed, ... in mind).
18 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:The point would be to consider what kind of role they would serve based on how the player chooses. To me there should be a choice as to whether it would be a super-soldier like officer or a powerful mainline infantry unit.
These kind of choices were cool if they were a much more integral part of the game (cf. Age of Mythology God choices), so not restricted to Spartans, but available to any civ in some way.
-
Thank you for the link, an interesting comparison
I have also been thinking that it would be nice to have Spartan hoplites right from the start, however, that will make balancing much more difficult (at least if you want them to be these uber champs I have been describing...) On the other hand, one could argue that they are so expensive that you would completely cripple your economy if you trained more than a handful of them before reaching city phase.
Regarding cavalry and Skiritae I have no strong opinion at this point. I would tinker with the other units once I have the feeling that the Spartiates has found its place and is more or less balanced.
I actually remember that I also thought of a fear aura for the advanced ranks of the champion. Completely forgot about it! I also experimented with a very short ranged aura that would basically allow them to provide their direct neighbors in a phalanx formation with additional resistances, essentially making them in phalanx much tougher than in loose combat.
5 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:it didn't get much buzz probably because it was long, a fair critique
My impression is that on the forums we are talking a lot and that is fine as long as we do not expect others to realize our ideas. I'm not saying that you won't inspire any action, but I think in general it's more productive to create a working patch or mod, so others can test your ideas with a relatively small amount of effort. I have to remind myself of that when I write, otherwise I tend to get frustrated.
-
The ones of you who have a close eye on the recent commits and patches in the queue will have noticed that there are efforts being made to further differentiate the current civs either by unique bonuses and/or buildings. I am assuming that I am not the only one seeing great potential for Spartans in that direction, especially since the removal of their pop penality leaves room for new things. I think it is time to share my ideas from a mod draft made several years ago, but never finished/published. See the following description and proposals as an inspiration for new/alternative/enhanced Spartan gameplay.
The core idea is to really push the Spartan trademarks: the absolute crème de la crème regarding quality, especially in the defensive part, at the cost of reduced quantity and a lot of time and resources spent to bring their warriors to perfection. In lategame they should be near unstoppable - only the infamous man spam train should do the job - being among the strongest civs, preferably the strongest alone. A Spartiate phalanx (even more so with Leonidas) should feel like an immovable object similar to Carthaginian walls. Their offensive should be very slow, but deadly (cf. Teutonic knights in AoE II). They will fight like a beast to defend their home territory and shine the most in team games where they can occupy and block strategic positions. However, they should be especially vulnerable in early game / village phase and below average in mid game / town phase (careful, detailed and well-targeted balancing may be needed) in order to compensate for their incredible late game potential. They are characterized by the following unique features:
-
tech "The Agoge": waaay more impactful than now
- Spartiates cost around 2 times the resources of regular champions (including 2 population), optionally only one of them can be trained per house
- they should be able to 1v2 regular champions, and with all other bonuses described below even 1v3 should be possible (at least under some circumstances)
-> reduced quantity, better overall quality, slightly more cost efficient than other champions -
tech "Hippagretae": these were the guys electing the ~300 best Spartiates called Hippeis
- Spartiates can upgrade to stronger Hippeis after collecting some XP (killing 2-3 enemies) (like citizen soldiers from basic -> advanced rank)
- optionally Hippeis can further upgrade to some kind of semi-hero after collecting a huge amount of XP (killing 7 or 10 enemies), but that may be over the top (like citizen soldiers from advanced -> elite rank)
-> better overall quality -
CC aura "Wall of Men": some Greek author used this term to explain why Sparta didn't need walls
- +2 resistance for Spartiates in a 80 range around CCs
- alternatively more concentrated: +4 resistance in a 30 range around CCs
-> better defensive quality -
Leonidas hero aura "Thermopylae": replacing current offensive aura by a purely defensive one
- +2 resistance and -10% speed for spearmen in his formation
- alternatively +3 resistance and -15% speed for Spartiates in his formation
-> better defensive quality -
better represent the role of Spartan women and Helote slaves
- Helote slaves as most efficient gatherers (use slave actor from Athenians)
- Spartan women have less than mediocre gather rates themselves, but a gather boost aura for Helotes (being their mistress)
- Spartan women have a basic combat ability, suitable for creating an emergency home defence against citizen soldiers (but not against champions) and they are able to build all buildings including military ones
-> more complex economy, slow development, but higher potential (for the huge amount of resources needed for unique techs and champions)
-> slightly better defensive quality
I hope you find at least some of these ideas inspiring and suitable as a basis for more patches to come! Feedback and further ideas welcome
Best regards, Palaxin
-
3
-
1
-
tech "The Agoge": waaay more impactful than now
-
2 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
Perhaps someone can make a "Very Very Easy" mod.
There should also be an "Insane" difficulty level.
I'm thinking about it for A24. No promises though, since there are several exams waiting in the coming weeks.
It may be better however to include more difficulties in the vanilla version, since a "very very easy" AI would be interesting primarily for beginners which might not be aware of the presence of such a mod.
In general I dislike differentiating AI difficulty simply by tweaking gather/building rates instead of strategic/tactical decisions, i.e. a harder AI shouldn't be harder because of quantity in the first place, but because of intelligence. However that's a huge project on its own, certainly not within my possibilities.
-
Hello @DanW58,
if you feel comfortable digging in a game file, you could also mod the AI difficulty in binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/helpers/InitGame.js, line 47 (AI gather rate) and line 48 (build and train time). The second entry in the square brackets defines the very easy AI.
Dirty solution: unzip your binaries/data/mods/public folder on your computer, edit the file and zip the folder with the edited file again
Elegant solution: create a mod that changes AI difficulties, distributable as .pyromod or downloadable on mod.io (the wiki pages modding guide and mod layout can be helpful here)
-
1
-
-
SpoilerOn 28/06/2018 at 11:28 PM, Stan` said:
Those are good ideas. Maybe @Prodigal Son could consider some of them for the design document.
It's missing sockets
I wish you had a coding team working on DE as well.
On 16/07/2018 at 1:47 PM, Stan` said:Well currently remaining active devs ( I'm counting an average of 2.5 these days) are trying to make the game compliant to European law to at least have the opportunity to be able to fix those.
For everything gameplay related ask both @Itms and @Prodigal Son directly (by Pm for example) as they are rewriting the gameplay document to make it a versionned contributable way of discussing gameplay. They'll know more about it than any of us here. Even though : "its a bug that needs to be fixed"
If you have suggestions for Delenda Est which for now is basically the most popular gameplay mod there is ( according to download stats) you can go in the relevant modding section.
For the matter here patches are better than words. Minor bugfixes are easy heh.
Thanks for coming back and contributing in your own way.
On 18/08/2018 at 5:08 PM, Stan` said:Of course this will have to be added edited by @Itms and @Prodigal Son in their documents. If it is to be included of course.
But to me:
A Stunnable entity is an entity that instead of dying when its health reach 0 just falls down on the battlefield. When friendly units arrive nearby a bar charges with a given timeout and if they stay around for enough time the unit goes back to life. If you don't stick around the bat discharge to 0.
This ability will be configurable. The timeout will be variable, and the unit can have a limited or an unlimited amount of revival for potential scenarios. An entity can be optionally dropped on knockout like a grave.
The bar charging could be a bar or stars filling up as long as the feeling of progression is conserved.
On 11/09/2018 at 10:42 AM, Stan` said:Actually the fact that it isn't planned isn't true. There is work being made on a design document to help us tackle features and mechanics. It is being worked on by @Itms and @Prodigal Son behind the scenes.
On 08/01/2019 at 8:04 PM, Stan` said:@DarcReaver: @Prodigal Son is. His current task is to scrap everything from the old design document and make it usable again. He has been working on it for a few months now, because the old one was a mess, and there were a lot of outdated stuff, stuff that didn't belong etc. From what I understood at the last conference I did with Itms, we will release it publicly when he is done. I'm not in touch with @Prodigal Son, only @Itms is, so if you want more informations about the ETA or the global plan you'd have to ask either one of them.
This document will be a GitBook Markdown document, where everyone can submit patches to make it evolve. As to who can review such patches, I don't know so I can't give an answer.
@Prodigal Son@Itms@Stan` Are there any news on this?
I don't know about your internal plans (though I would like to
) so thought it would be a good idea to encourage you tackling this before entering Beta, otherwise I fear there won't be a major reform to overall gameplay of 0 A.D. ever. Just referring to the post of feneur when announcing the switch at the project leader position, because already at that time it seemed Beta is on the horizon - however I have the impression that I'm not the only person who prefers the necessary overhauls before going forward...
On 13/11/2016 at 7:37 PM, feneur said:[...] Now I've found the perfect replacement: Nicolas Auvray, also known as Itms on the forums and in the IRC channels. He has been a part of the project for several years now, and has proved to be a valuable contributor, a sensible and thoughtful leader, and a good friend. I asked him whether he wanted to take over the leadership, after careful consideration he said yes and we presented the possibility to the team who agreed it was a good choice to move forward with Nicolas as the leader.
I have confidence he will revitalize the team and work to guide 0 A.D. through the Alpha process and into Beta and beyond. [...]
-
On 01/12/2020 at 11:08 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
At the "scale" of the game it's best to depict institutions rather than granular details like the relative strength of the average man and woman.
Ok, I can understand your reasoning, though I think depicting differences would still make it more interesting. Vanilla 0 A.D. just seems quite plain to me regarding unit variety (at least compared to AoE II with 35 civs with special units, unique techs etc. or AoM with a lot of choices through primary and secondary gods). The factions could profit a lot from fleshing out more differences, but that's another topic.
In the context of this thread I assumed equalizing the stats of women and men was proposed in order to address sexism which is not the best way IMO. Simply because women and men are not the same in every aspect on average, especially when it comes to some hard, measurable facts (and I would count work output in measurable units as one - of course depending on the kind of work). The question of sexism is a question of how they are seen, treated and what rights they have, and I think that is something extremely difficult to depict in an RTS with its limited scope and complexity. The problem is that 0 A.D. focuses almost exclusively on areas that were men's domain in the depicted timeframe and as already discussed we get conflicts with historic accuracy if we would derive from that... So depicting men and women in an ideal state (and what that is, is still somewhat subjective I'd say) would result in a non-historic, sci-fiction or fantasy game - which inherently carries a flavour of utopia since the world is imperfect...
On 29/11/2020 at 11:06 PM, Crea said:I get the time frame women can't "fight" aspect of that time but could you at least make a little less sexist by making it so there are male gathers that also can't fight? Or making it so there are like amazon warriors? Or better yet both? Here's more on the amazon warriors: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/10/141029-amazons-scythians-hunger-games-herodotus-ice-princess-tattoo-cannabis/
I would appreciate these proposals though as far as proven historic knowledge allows us to do and integration into the game concept as a whole would make sense.
-
10 hours ago, Nescio said:
As for the aura, just delete it. It's not only sexist, but also unrealistic and without historical justification. Moreover, I doubt the AI understands how to make use of it.
Good change and thank you for the patch! Apart from what you already mentioned, it also introduced unnecessary micro (which should be shifted to other areas IMO).
10 hours ago, Nescio said:Anyway, in 0 A.D. female citizens have different work rates than male citizens. In my opinion male workers should be introduced with exactly the same values as their female counterparts, for all factions. In Age of Empires II, there were no differences between male and female villagers either.
13 hours ago, Imarok said:We should just have female and male workers with the same stats. This seems more accurate.
Disagree. Similar to many animal species, humans do have a sexual dimorphism, e.g. by nature men have a larger muscle mass on average (advantageous adaptation for hunting I guess) whereas women have a higher percentage of body fat on average (advantageous adaptation for pregnancy I guess). Depending on the activity/work, this dimorphism should translate into different work rates in some areas where the differences matter, e.g. where you have to use heavy tools or carry heavy load (lumbering, probably mining, but not gathering berries). At least this sounds reasonable and actually not offending to me. If you are looking for confirmation, compare the performances of women and men at the Olympic games.
Regarding Age of Empires II, I think 0 A.D. was born because of the opportunity to make things different from it, not to mimic it...
-
2
-
-
On 5/18/2018 at 9:59 AM, Sundiata said:
[...] That makes at least 15 Greco-Roman names out of 23 alphas. [...] How about finally merging Rise of the East with the main game and naming alpha 23 "Xiongnu"?
On 5/18/2018 at 10:12 AM, Lion.Kanzen said:Add Xiongnu
On 5/18/2018 at 11:50 AM, Nescio said:[...] Xiongnu (Hsiung-nu) and Han China, yes please.
On 5/18/2018 at 5:33 PM, Sundiata said:[...] Or we could go with "Xiyu" Han Chinese for "Western Regions", an area fought over with the Xiongnu and paramount for control over the silk-road, connecting everything in the Eurasian sphere together). [...]
On 5/18/2018 at 5:51 PM, Sundiata said:[...] How could there be any resistance to including the Chinese as a playable civilization when the actual logo of Wildfire Games is CHINESE??? [...]
On 5/18/2018 at 6:40 PM, Sundiata said:[...] The logo of the game developer is Chinese. We have a complete and historical Chinese civ lying on the shelf. Yet, Chinese names won't be accepted for the next release ... because there's no Chinese in the standard game... It's like, AAAARGH?!?!
On 5/19/2018 at 12:07 PM, Diptangshu said:Firstly, I am keen to know that whether development team is planning to place Han or Shang or Jōmon or any other Asia based civilization in future alpha versions or not. If, they are planning to do so, I have some wonderful names in my mind... [...]
1. Xi-Wang ( http://www.meaning-of-names.com/chinese-names/xi-wang.asp ) This, name suggests for future hope (as par the meaning) (Xi-Wang in Chinese it means hope and it can be used as a phrase for both feminine and masculine character)
2. Xiang ( https://www.behindthename.com/name/xiang ) This name suggests for a future prosperity and good luck (Xiang in Chinese means 'good omen' or simply good luck). [...]
On 10/12/2018 at 12:25 PM, Diptangshu said:As, Sundiata earlier suggested Xiongnu is a good name [...] I would prefer any Eastern Asian names from Han, Xiongnu or any other Asian civs... It would be better for both the future prospect and also for the newly come contributer from Asia to contribute more in this game... [...] So, I prefer any kind of Non-group non-roman names and also prefer for the developers decision to add new Asian civs (like Han, Xinognu, Yayoi or something like that)... [...]
On 9/3/2019 at 11:03 AM, Nescio said:If Han China were included in the game, then how about Xianyang, the capital city of Qin Shi Huang (the man who unified China), whose mausoleum in the necropolis includes the world-famous terracotta army? The Han China took over a few years after his death and moved the capital to nearby Chang'an (modern Xi'an).
On 9/7/2019 at 3:44 AM, sphyrth said:+1 for Xianyang for the same cheer of adding the Hans in the game. We tend to have problems naming stuff that don't have the Greek / Latin letters in them... especially now that we're tired of using Greek or Roman names.
On 9/7/2019 at 7:30 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:This alpha being over a year going, I think adding the Han (and archery ranges, stables, and workshops) would make it worth the wait.
On 11/22/2019 at 11:11 PM, badosu said:If Han civilization gets in, I agree with Xianyang since it highlights the addition.
On 12/14/2019 at 3:19 AM, sphyrth said:I'm calling it. These succeeding Alphas will be the time for Terra Magna: Xiongnu for 24 Yayoi for 25 Zapotec for 26
I would love to see Alpha 24 themed around Asia/Chinese as well with the inclusion of the Hans (even if it took 1 year from now to the release). I have no strong opinion on specific names though...
-
1
-
-
terrain grid, I suppose
Yeah its mainly for aesthetics and also efficient use of building space to a small degree. Furthermore it feels more satisfying / less tiring trying to build houses with same distance to one another or in a certain pattern (more important for single player use or map creation than for multiplayer)
-
5 hours ago, (-_-) said:
Unit positions does not have any restrictions like AoE2 does. Buildings and units can be placed anywhere and rotated in any angle.
Would be nice though to have snap-to-grid building placement in the options...
(has been proposed/discussed before, I don't remember the reason why this is undesirable and still don't see it, at least as an option it wouldn't hurt anybody)
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, stanislas69 said:
@Mina unfortunately our application was not accepted. They were pretty vague as to why they just said they had too many applications.
I know from Terasology that they applied several years in a row before they were accepted the first time, and after that they were every year IIRC. Sounds a bit like a hidden queue for newcomers. But persistence will pay off probably...
-
4
-
-
Today a trac user called "Mike William" replaced the contents of the wiki start page with spam. I restored the contents but I can't delete the attached file (special permission required?). Please correct! Thanks
-
5
-
-
@Prodigal Son your application makes me write my first post after 8 months... One of the best things I've read on this forums so far, giving me new hope for the future of this game... I wish you and the team the best (may they accept your offer!)... Hopefully gameplay will no longer limit the true potential of 0 A.D.!
-
3
-
-
Sorry for posting this so early... And sorry @sphyrth for stealing this idea from your April Fool's post. But I think there really is only one choice:
Alpha 23 Wololo
We certainly know that the term "wololo" isn't complete bullshit. And by adding a new cheat unit we could easily justify that name. Typing "wololooo" should spawn a super monk that will convert all enemies very fast by wololo-ing them. What do you think?
-
3
-
-
-
1
-
-
On 2/20/2017 at 8:45 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
-
1 hour ago, sanderd17 said:
The same with a fortress, when you construct one, it gets equipped with something that represents the minimum amount of personnel to man it.
This is to avoid unneeded micro managing, as realistically, fortresses that aren't manned at all should be immediately capturable, ships that aren't manned can't move or do anything else. How would you even man a ship that gets spawned in front of a dock?
This is a clear case where gameplay aspects need to get preference over realism. And it's a consistent deviation from reality throughout the game. So I don't see a problem at all.
One could argue that structures must include food costs then. I agree that minimizing micro is a valid point here, but I think 0 A.D. is missing some details that may or may not affect gameplay but create a UNIQUE ATMOSPHERE, e.g. something like children (Stronghold) and structures with animated workers (Settlers).
-
1
-
-
+1 for Wololo Alpha!
-
2 minutes ago, elexis said:
[...] relics ought to be spawned if and only if relics victory is active.
They could be also interesting in other game modes once relic bonuses/auras have been added.
0AD GUI and icons
in General Discussion
Posted · Edited by Palaxin
1366x768 as minimum supported resolution for the vanilla version of 0 A.D. sounds most reasonable for me. It also shares the same aspect ratio (16:9) like the de-facto standard 1080p which allows the same proportions for GUI elements when scaling.
However, when talking about GUI, resolutions are only one part. What I miss in 0 A.D. is something more immersive and organic/natural than the current (flexible, but kind of technical for a historical game) one... Note that the following examples also use a minimum of text, numbers and/or signs which every good gui should aim for IMO (in any case make extensive texts optional, as part of an overlay and/or in-game encyclopedia).
I really liked the old settlers games in this regard, where the gui featured marble surfaces and small decorative plants:
or Stronghold Crusader