Jump to content

Nescio

Community Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2.300

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    23

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Nescio

  1. Lack of Eastern

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    23 minutes ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:

    Bear in mind that many times there have been new factions added even when the benchmark has been set.  At first it was just six.  It expanded a lot from there obviously.  Rest assured; there is the possibility of having new civilisations like Thebes, Syracuse, Pergamon, and the Achaean League because the more Hellenic civilisations, the better.  :) 

    Actually I'd favour (re-)merging Athenians and Spartans into a single Greek civilization. Yes, I'm aware Greece was not a unified political entity prior to the Romans, however, nor was Gaul or were the Britons. And the differences between those city states were not as great as many might think.

    Besides, the current situation raises questions: if Athens and Sparta, then why not Thebes? Argos? Corinth? Syracusae? Etc. Having just one civilization for all Greek city states and leagues would easily solve this.

  2. Lack of Eastern

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    5 minutes ago, coworotel said:

    Han and Xiongnu are already available in Terra Magna.

    Yes, I know, however, I'm still hoping they'll eventually be included into the main distribution, where they belong. Besides, I don't want the Zapotecs :)

    • Like 2

  3. Lack of Eastern

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Nescio
    more

    Parthia and Pontus were actually Hellenistic states as well. Anyway, I fully agree more factions would be nice to have, especially those that fill the gaps in our current roster. My order of preference:

    • Arsacid Empire (Parthians), peaked under Mithridates II of Parthia (r. 121–91 BC)
    • Greater Armenia, peaked under Tigranes II of Armenia (r. 95–55 BC)
    • Pontus, peaked under Mithridates VI of Pontus (r. 120–63 BC)
    • Odrysian Kingdom (Thracians), peaked under Sitalces I (r. 431–424 BC)
    • Scythians
    • Han (Chinese)
    • Xiongnu/Hsiung-nu
    • Greco-Bactrian Kingdom
    • Numidia (Massylii and Masaesyli), peaked under Masinissa (r. 202–148 BC)
    • Epirus, peaked under Pyrrhus of Epirus (r. 297–272 BC)
    • Attalid Kingdom (Pergamon), Bithynia, Cappadocia, Bosporan Kingdom (Crimea), Colchis, Iberia, Albania, Athropatene, etc. are probably too insignificant.

    Ideally we ought to include the Archaic Period (c. 900–500 BC) as well:

    • Neo-Assyrian Empire
    • Neo-Babylonian Empire (Chaldeans)
    • Etruscans
    • Lydians
    • Urartu
    3 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

    No new faction for 500-1 BC to second part Parthia, Palmyra, Sassanid Dynasty, Kushans(may be) and Huns.

    Those others are post-1 AD, yes, however, Parthia really belongs in the pre-1 BC timeframe.

    • Like 3

  8. Pacing in 0 A.D.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    As for your proposal, I agree 0 A.D.'s civilizations are too similar and phases unrewarding. Personally I'd actually prefer to phase out phases and instead allow settlements to promote individually, depending on the number of (different?) structures within its inner radius.

    • Like 1

  9. Pacing in 0 A.D.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Nescio
    No, I don't want my replies to be merged.

    To clarify, I actually like to be surprised. I merely commented because I've not seen you (or anyone else) use paragraph indentation on these forums before. Although I would make different typographic choices, at least you gave time and thought how to mark up your text. Please continue to follow your own style :)

    PS English often omits the diaeresis (tréma) on naive, contrary to French.
    PPS You can use Shift+Enter to start a new line without a white line in between.
    PPPS Your signature has only one ".

  10. Pacing in 0 A.D.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    17 minutes ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:

    Lastly although changing the models each phase might be difficult, there could be as simple of changing the textures to look dirtier and staler in the village phase to more vibrant colours in the later phases.

    Actually it ought to be the other way around: contrary to popular belief, cities were (and are) a lot dirtier than villages.

    • Like 1

  11. Pacing in 0 A.D.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    Thank you for your post! You managed to amaze me again with your unusual typography. Not only do you type two full spaces between sentences (as you've done earlier), but now you also started to indent your paragraphs (I didn't see you do that earlier) after white lines. Typically people avoid combining the two. And indenting the first paragraph is often considered bad taste in English (but not in French). Of course, everyone is allowed to mark up his messages in any way they like. Unusual typography merely distracts me :)

    PS Something I do appreciate is that you use proper “quotation marks” and not programmer's "cat claws".

    • Haha 1

  14. Gameplay features A24

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    6 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    That would be hard to integrate into one diplomacy screen with tribute and other info/features. What about as a tab or pop-up window accessed from the diplomacy screen?

    A pop-up when your cursor hovers over the "change stance" area or a button below to toggle advanced diplomacy overview would be fine by me; I have no idea how to implement it though :)

  15. Gameplay features A24

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    21 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    The whole diplo screen needs redesigned. I can design something nice, but I have no skills to implement it.

    Please display everyone's current phase. A table overview would also be nice to keep track of diplomatic changes, e.g.: 

    ×, 1, 2, 3, 4
1, ×, A, N, E
2, A, ×, E, N
3, N, E, ×, A
4, E, N, A, ×

     

  20. DE Alpha 23b rebundle

    in Delenda Est

    Posted

    24 minutes ago, stanislas69 said:

    Apparently @Itms told me that the version should be something like 1.0.0 to fit with mod.io schema (MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH) this will allow mods to be incompatible among versions. Because if you use 0.0.23 there is no way you can know the difference between mods. It seems that some mods should fix this too.

    What will be the version number of the A23 re-release then? 0.0.24?

  24. Wow's and Wow Jr.'s Awesome Gameplay Wishes

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Nescio
    ce

    2 hours ago, stanislas69 said:

    Correct I guess that's why we have mod dependencies ? :)

    Yes, we do, I'm aware of that. Suppose we would have the following mod structure tree:

    modmod
    + pyrogenesis/engine
    ++ public/gaia/shared stuff
    +++ EA (500-1 BC)
    +++ EB (1-500 AD)

    I'd imagine both EA and EB would want to use the same maps and AI, as would other unrelated mods (e.g. Hyrule Conquest) therefore it would make sense to put those in the new public mod. However, AI and maps also have civ-specific content, therefore the game would still require EA or EB or crash otherwise.

    A separation might be wise long term, but will be an enormous and troublesome task short term without immediate benefit.

    • Like 1

  25. Wow's and Wow Jr.'s Awesome Gameplay Wishes

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, elexis said:

    I was hoping to be able to split the public mod into two mods.

    • One mod has the 0 A.D. content that would be left out if there was 500 A.D. or a mod that comes with only original content: models, textures, music tracks, maps, translations, templates, fonts; that could be called empires_ascendant for sure.
    • The other mod would be pyrogenesis simulation and shader code and the GUI pages. There are only few things that are hardcoded 0ad references in gui/ and simulation/ that can just be moved to some js, json or xml file.

    Yes, separating the engine from the content certainly makes sense. I never dared to propose it myself, though :)

    1 hour ago, stanislas69 said:

    Yeah. That's what I was hoping for

    Modmod -> Engine stuff and gui pages and shaders.

    Public -> Eyecandy art and generic art 

    Empire_Ascendant -> 13 civs + their specific eyecandy.

    Empire_Besieged aka Part II -> Part 2 stuff.

     

    Where would you put maps? They include both gaia and civ objects. And the AI? It requires both classes and hard-coded templates. On the other hand, you might want to avoid duplication.

×
×
  • Create New...