Palaiogos
-
Posts
111 -
Joined
Posts posted by Palaiogos
-
-
Have any of you played Stronghold Crusader or Stronghold 2? The walls should be like that. You could move the units individually on the wall, and units could fire at units on the wall.
-
1
-
-
How accurate as a source is Europa Barbarorum? It seems like the people here don't like to use it. It is a good source for ancient languages, however.
-
What do they say in this video:
-
It's Greek?! Then how come when they attack they say, "bras palaman" or something like that? Shouldn't it be, "Ακατακος Μαρκαστει." Or Akatakos Markastei?
-
Talking about voices, what is the language that the rest of the factions are speaking with, "Tiesti", or those other things that they say?
-
I don't know if I can do this, but I am opening a thread on ideas for Byzantine Empire. This is so that the devs can try to start the Byzantines.
The first one is that the Byzantines should have three champions. They are the klivanophoroi/Kataphractoi, the Varangian Guard, and Mourtatoi.
Another part is that, like AOE 2, it needs to have good defensive capabilities.
My two cents, let the thread begin!
-
A good thing is that maybe we shouldn't have the capture all the way from the beginning. Players need to research capture.
-
1
-
-
For those people who don't like the capture feature, then maybe it could be toggled like C&C Generals Zero Hour you click the flag if you want to capture, and there is cool down time after you capture.
-
2 minutes ago, niektb said:
This is exactly the map, but I am too lazy to convert it to Alpha 20
-
My dream map (more like dream scenario) would be a siege of Constantinople scenario. It would be for Millenium AD once it is finished.
-
On March 31, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Dade said:
Correct me if I'm wrong @SeleucidKing, but I guess your question behind the lines is: Are we (community and/or dev team) prepared for this? My personal answer is: NO WAY!
Before even seriously consider large scale competitions there are still so incredibly much things to do... and competitive focused balancing is probably at the bottom of the list. Moreover, balance cannot be achieved in variety, it's just another marketing strategy from game publisher to sell more titles but truth is no one still has made a true balanced game (I can make a list of games I've played where there are clearly a maximum of 2, maybe 3, dominant weapons/strategies). As for RTS, the only balance is playing with identical factions on a symmetric map, but then again - given same skill level - there would be a dominant strategy --> wait behind walls; unless of course, we introduce some candy micromanagement feature which can be game-changer (for example, flanking damage, formations bonus/malus and cavalry charge).
Back to topic, I'd rather approach new games with exciting features rather than promise of competitive-aware development. For example, I'm sure many Company of Heroes players would enjoy to see another game having dynamic cover or different movement speeds depending on terrain. Maybe we need to brainstorm to bring something original idea and bring even more glory to a game which is already great at this stage of development.
If we still wants to make some sort of competition, why we couldn't start with something simple like 'Release Cup' and/or 'Release Candidate Cup' (epic hah), achieving both stimulating competitions and helping devs with live, instant, first hand feedback and even material for video-changelogs? As an additional suggestion, including winner and runner-up nicknames on the game credits could be enough prize for now
PS: @Mr.Monkey I'm not a CS fan, but CS:GO was really disappointing in it's release, and there was no competition at all. Competitive scene rise up when Valve started to put money prizes on tournaments, then most pro players from older CS versions switched to GO. If we make a competition with a million dollar pool prizes, be sure you won't need much to get players into your game hah
I think in every RTS game there are three strategies (or at least 6 subways): turtle, Rush, and boom. As long as all factions can do these three strategies, balanced, it can be a good game that might be competitive.
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, causative said:
To be really accurate the biggest change would have to be food. Food would be a resource continually consumed by all units, instead of just buying a unit for a fixed amount of food. If your food production is interrupted and you run out of food reserves your units would begin to starve, suffering lower stats and losing HP until they die. 95% of people around 0 A.D. were farmers so this is really important.
Why was the starvation method of siege effective? Because the defenders needed very large fields to get food for themselves, and they couldn't afford to build and defend walls around that large area. This was an essential part of military strategy. Fields should be huge, covering large areas of the map, and hard to defend. Corrals would require large fields too (sheep have to graze).
With this idea we would not need the thread of no walls allowed in multi.
-
Same here Lion.Kanzen
-
I have some ideas on how this faction could become unique. We could make it a cross between the Carthaginians and the Romans. The Byzantines were famous for their use of mercenaries. In the 3 ages, the first unit would be the aconistae, and then the kontaratoi. As said in one of the first posts the cavalry unit would be the hippo akritai. In the 2nd age include the scoutatoi and the toxotae from the barracks. Swords men would be called Spathatoi. Third age they need regular akritai (akri in Greek means border) and in come the champion archers, infantry and cavalry. Cavalry would be klivanophoroi, infantry: Varangian Guard, archers would be mourtatoi. Another unit would probably be horse archers as mercenaries called Skythikoi.
-
Will the Byzantines be part of the new release?
-
My point is that even though they aren't completely accurate, they are still popular. A game can be both!
-
53 minutes ago, fatherbushido said:
You say that it must be like that ? If so, it's yet how 0ad works.
I mean that there aren't any turrets that shoot, but the archers and cross bowmen on the ramparts and walls shoot. You can move them around too.
-
Basically you have a radius where you can build walls. Outside the radius you can't build walls. Walls also didn't shoot.
How come we can't make the walls like the Stronghold series? The walls can't shoot, but archers and crossbow men get huge buffs (historically) on the walls. That solves all the problems except we probably would need 10,000 soldier battles like Stronghold.
-
15 hours ago, SeleucidKing said:
Okay, myself included, I see a lot of threads talking about units, balancing, and gameplay mechanics. But I think that we as a community (and the devs) need to think about is what type of game do we want.
Do we want a popular game? One that exploded into relative popularity, and has a decent chance of the creation of a competitive, and maybe even professional scene?
Or are we looking for the hidden gem of gaming? One that isnt the most well known game, and if it is, there isnt, if at all, a large competitive scene. Just a casual game for those that love history and gaming.
This needs to be decided before the engine is finished, because the two options have very different mechanics and balancing. Our current setup is the latter of the two choices. To get a really competitive game (look at anything Blizzard has made) the factions need a VERY different feels for each faction. The Carthaginians need not only a different roster or strategy from the Romans, they need to feel and play different. No two factions should be able to play in quite the same way as each other. Look at Starcraft and Warcraft as examples. Its virtually impossible to play the Protoss the same way as the Zerg.
This is something that needs to be decided.
There are a lot of games that are both historically accurate and competitive. The entire Age of Empires series, Total Wars after Medieval 2 (but before Rome 2), Europa Barbarorum, the list goes on and on. The ancient world was a balanced place. If Rome had misstepped at the battle of Pydna, we might be speaking Greek today. If Scipio Africanvs died hen we might be speaking Punic. If Alexandros Ho Megas died before his conquests we might be speaking Persian. If he didn't die of malaria, well China might be Greek. My point is that all of the ancient world was balanced at a point.
-
Causative: ever played BFME2? Maybe the walls can be like that.
-
I like the idea of making palisade walls build able in neutral territory. That is pretty realistic to the time (Alesia). But I would suggest that maps should be bigger and catapults should have 200-300 range like in actual life. The range of arrows can keep at 100 because that is historically accurate. Also how come this problem never happened in Age of Empires, or Rise of Nations?
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Dade said:
Ive had a little research and found this article. Seems like Roman's catapults could easily reach 300 meters O_o
True, but we would probably have to make the maps really huge to balance the difference. Also what will the oxybeles range be, because they were probably 200-250 meters? That won't be good for balance.
Edit: Change oxybeles to litho bolos
-
1
-
-
Yes, but ranged units make it so that people could have a defense against champs. I just spam ranged units against champs and back them up with my okay phalanxes as the Seleukids.
-
I agree that siege engines should be buffed, but maybe there can be a new strategy. I am proposing a "starve" strategy because let's say you are playing on Greek Acropolis and they wall their Acropolis in. You can simply starve them of resources because the only things that they can get is food. Tank the market for wood and iron, and they can't produce anything but women. Sounds like a good strategy? Then after drive your force with everything you have got and break through the walls. With the buffed siege equipment it should fall quickly. Especially if the enemy doesn't have allies.
)
Extending Visible Garrisonning
in General Discussion
Posted
Compromise:
1. The walls should be like the Stronghold series.
2. The buildings that are garrisoned have the same properties as before (harder to capture, shoot arrows, heal units, etc.)
3. Walls should have an ability to join to structures like barracks, and fortresses, maybe even civic centers like Stronghold 2.