.png.8ea4f489c9bd30328cea8b6fb9c0b1dd.png)
Grapjas
-
Posts
499 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Posts posted by Grapjas
-
-
10 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
Are you sure? Looks like Atlas. Units placed in Atlas and then the simulation is run, can be initially desynced with props until they are first moved and then they resync.
Very sure. And out of 20 horses or so there, there are always a couple of these in them.
-
4 hours ago, wraitii said:
I think it'd be great if people added their own frustration to this list
It would be nice if there would be a guide in editing xml files aswell (if there is one, i havent found it). They aren't hard to mod but it is hard to know what elements/attributes can or cannot be used inside them, and strolling past each file to find something you can use (which may not even exist) is a pain in the ass tbh. So im basically suggesting for a reference list on what is possible inside xml files. On top of that, a tutorial to incorperate new elements inside xml to work with your js code.
just my 2 cents.
-
1 hour ago, Angen said:
hi,
do you have this in game or in atlas?
I remember props not being synchronized in atlas but would work in game.
This was ingame, without mods.
-
(forgive me if these are known issues)
1. Horse animation and props often do not sync with eachother & sometimes blink (seems like the transition for animation loop end and start are not smooth):
2. art/actors/units/carthaginians/infantry_javelinist_a / _b / _e
seem to be unused and therefore can be deleted. They use merc Iberian skirmishers. -
18 minutes ago, Genava55 said:
Still about the engineers?
No i meant spear melee cavalry in general, i was wondering what extra weapons they would have along with the spear, and if a shield was common with their kit (ingame they dont atm). I think i saw some pictures where they had a shield but im not so sure if it was reliable info.
-
@Thorfinn the Shallow Minded@Genava55 do you have any thoughts about the spear(melee) cavalry armor/weapon kit? Would they normally have shields? Would they have a couple of javs (or other ranged)? The more civ specific the better
-
I was wondering if anybody has the time and will to help me out with this because i have absolutely no knowledge about blender, textures etc. Currently there is no available sheath for daggers and i'd like to add them to my mod if someone would be willing to make them. It would be nice if they could be worn on the chest, but on hip would be fine too (prop point = sheath_01/02_L/R). It would be important that there is also an empty version of the sheath, just like some existing swords already have (sheath_xiphos, sheath_xiphos_e).
Then as a sidenote, the sheath for the falcata is not working properly. They currently clip through the sheathes. If somebody would be willing to fix this i'd really appreciate the help.
.thumb.png.551113915d12405bdcde062a1d126284.png)
Files/paths for ease of access (from svn):
art/actors/props/units/weapons/sheath_falcata.xml
art/actors/props/units/weapons/sheath_falcata_e.xmlThanks in advance
-
2
-
-
@wraitii This is why a rock/paper/scissor system generally speaking works well. A tech/unit/thing can be strong but it needs to have a counter. I agree fully that balancing is a very hard thing to get right. One of the obvious advantages to batallion vs individuals would be that if the individual misses it target, he will likely hit the guy next to him (clutter), a siege weapon will likely hit alot of them at the same time etc. Another downside of batalion would be that you cant really microtarget enemies if you wanted to but they are 'easier' to manage.
My point was, if you get your ass kicked, you need to play with / against people of your skill level and thats where you will find enjoyment. Someone simply shouldnt expect to win from an experienced 1800 rated player if you are newb 1200.
But just because there are 100 options/ways to play a game doesnt mean you would need to use all 100 of them. It's about freedom for the player to choose a selection of 100 tools to execute a strategy he wants. <- This is what RTS is all about for me personally.
EDIT: it's possible i misunderstood some of your points so take my reply with a grain of salt.
-
1 minute ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
The only thing strange is that the operators rise up out of the ground with the catapult as it's being built. I've done a couple of tests with the actor to stop this with no success yet, but I think it should be possible to make the operators not appear until the construction is completed.
Doesnt sound impossible to fix, but i'd need to do some digging for that.
-
1 hour ago, Dragonoar said:
You can't have a game where you micromanage everything
Generally speaking, you would only micromanage everything if it's in a competitive/high skill setting. If somebody doesnt want to they can just play casually tbh. For some players, micromanaging = fun. For others its horrible. But yeah, batallions definitely reduce micro.
On 17/03/2021 at 2:39 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:Have you played either of the Battle for Middle Earth games?
Absolutely loved them.
-
57 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
All of that is true, but to have yet another unit type seems overkilled. Could just have a "Siege Engineers" tech that unlocks building field artillery with soldiers.
I fear its going to clutter the UI in a weird way if i also need to add icons for building siege units next to buildings. While a specialised unit doesnt have this issue. Also, the arsenal will remain as is, a place where siege can be build, so you dont neccesarily have to use engineers if you dont want to. But its not a bad suggestion if the icons could be somewhere else (havent done much modding in gui yet).
-
1 hour ago, Ratkid said:
I feel like most starting locations come with 1 ore of each type, and just the 5/6 berries
This would be your typical map setup for the initial phase yes. Along with 10 chicken and about 10 trees in direct reach near the CC that can be effectively cut down without needing a store house.
But the more important thing for balanced maps is that each player would have more or less the same amount of resources available. If someone has a group of deers nearby but the enemy doesnt, thats already a decent/big (depending on players skill) advantage.
-
1
-
-
It'd be nice if there was some form of team of pr team indeed. But even most people right here on the forum have barely any clue on what is really being changed. For this you would either need to visit trac.wildfiregames.com or visit IRC dev-chat daily. People ingame that dont visit the forums even more so have no clue at all what to expect, and imo as a QoL you shouldnt need to go to a forum to see what is being done.
It would be nice if there was an automated process to view the up-to-date changes from trac (is RSS an option?) in a 'message of the day window', along with a 'read more' button on game start up. Also, imo, the programmers/artists need to get some proper creds (meaning more visibly) for their work so that people can thank them and in return boost morale. So i would suggest that the ticket owner name would be visible too.
EDIT:
QuoteI considered a more modern term like "early access", but what kinds of connotations does that term convey?
I think the term early access is only applicable to pay to play games, but im not really sure.
-
2
-
-
From a player POV i would say the alpha tag is still proper though. But it's a very playable alpha. And once the performance enhances and runs smoother than it does now when there are alot of units, i would say thats when you should switch to beta and start hyping things up (first impression matters). Because from a player POV that's what you would probably expect from it- a semi smooth experience. Recently i invited someone to play 0 A.D., after a few games he said he liked 0 A.D. but was put off by the lagg and would come back if this was fixed. This in turn also shows that the community really loves the game if they keep playing it regardless.
I also think that alpha and beta increasingly lost their meaning over the past 5 or so years because of big companies. 'Early access' tag is part of the problem and is much more familiar these days. It semi replaced beta and alpha (and is now more of an excuse to sell a game that isnt finished yet).
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, alre said:
I am no historian, sorry about that. Anyway, I subscribe fully the idea of soldiers building rams and siege towers, and I would rather not introduce engineers, that look like unnecessary micro to me. If a soldier can build a house, he can also build a ram.
Just to be clear, this thread is not about putting changes into the main game, this is about adding stuff to my personal mod. It's about adding realism and will be a complete rebalance. Also for me personally its realism/strategy > micro. Especially if its worth it putting the effort in.
-
2
-
-
11 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:
sappers
Could you give some more info about these? Would sappers be the one that build engines aswell or should i make that a different unit?
-
26 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
Perhaps siege engines should be built by soldiers. Either after researching a tech or unlocked by building an Arsenal.
Wouldn't mind adding a unique 'engineer' unit trainable at the arsenal. Soldiers could make crappy siege, but engineers of much better quality (attack/def/hp boosts)
-
1
-
-
@Thorfinn the Shallow Minded, i was wondering if you have any information on how siege engines, more specifically the stone throwing ones, actually got their ammo. Were there like carts of ammo available nearby?
Edit: Also found some interesting stories about bowmen actually carrying two quivers which could lead up to a total of ~100 arrows at the ready, though that was in a later time period (not sure if that really matters when it comes to quivers).
-
10 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:
these were troops using lead projectiles
Just to double check, you mean the Rhodian hoplites were using lead projectiles? Or did you mean slingers in general? I was aware of these lead projectiles but i still thought stones found on terrain were more common (which is exactly why im removing stone cost for slingers). The plan for slingers right now is, they regain ammo anywhere slowly (to sort of mimic finding stones, thus regaining ammo), while other ranged can re-arm at military buildings. In any case, lead projectiles could serve well as a tech in the forge. Giving slingers more range and more attack but as a drawback they would need to re-arm at the military buildings from that point on.
I also wonder if romans should have slingers aswell, and removing javelineers for them but giving the champion and/or basic swordsman 1 or 2 jav ammo.
9 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:Keep in mind that in reality it was probably quite common for ranged troops to pick up ammunition off the ground from missiles fired at them by the enemy!
Thanks for the suggestion, i was aware
-
Would love it if the Lobby would mention what mod the room is using, instead of turning grey and out of sight at the bottom. Could be done in a column left side of players. Or make the columns draggable + resizeable.
-
3 hours ago, mysticjim said:
This is an interesting one, mate, I'm intrigued by the wounded status of the troops. In play, does it change the game a lot? I'm assuming you have to be conscious of your units health a lot more otherwise you could send swathes of your army to a slaughter if they aren't in fighting condition.
I'd say it changes the gameplay quite a bit. If your army is heavily wounded, you can get chased and slaughtered while retreating because healthy enemy units can actually catch up with you now. The trick would be to utilize the new field camps + healers in either neutral or enemy territory. It definitely needs some testing from players against players though.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:
Undoubtedly most soldiers did carry side-arms, but ammunition is a more difficult thing to consider since armies at this time were not standardised. What might have served as the amount of missiles a soldier carried in one campaign might vary with the next.
One interesting example of a case of reverse side-arms is mentioned in Xenophon's Anabasis, when a few Rhodian hoplites switched to using slings.
That's quite interesting indeed. Could make the Rhodian hoplite as a mercenary or a special limited unit in my mod. And give them slings along with the ordanary hoplite kit with less ammo and range (i assume they had full armor on?) than a normal lightweight slinger. Is it known why only a few did this? Were they men with more skill than others for example (because in this case i would make it a special rank)?
And yeah i figured the ammo would be hard to figure out. Would be interesting to know if like for example nubian archers carried bigger quivers with them than the mauryan archers. Would love to add such small details, even if it's like a 2 arrow difference in ammo.
-
1 hour ago, azayrahmad said:
I'm not a historian, but gameplay-wise every 0 AD unit already has knife for slaughtering purpose.
Xenophon said that Peltast (javelineers) use swords as secondary weapon. He also recommends kopis/makhaira for horsemen instead of xiphos.
You probably have seen this Survival mod by @Angen , otherwise this might help you as it has secondary weapon concept:
Thanks, yeah im aware of that mod. But i'm just looking for historical references in battle kits used by soldiers in that time for that civ. Wiki isnt reliable if it mentions no sources imo (and in this case it often doesnt mention sources), so thats where i really need help. The plan is to make the weapons visible on them at all times, and actually make them switch weapons (which already works).
-
Hi,
Currently i'm working on giving some units a secondary attack in my mod. It's making progress, but realism is of great importance for me. So i'm wondering if historians on this forum would like to help providing references on what extra weapon(s) these soldiers would have had in their kit for that civilization. All units are open for discussion but the units that have priority would be the following:
- Javelineers (both cavalry and infantry)
- Slingers
- Archers (both cavalry and infantry)
I'm also looking for references on how much ammo ranged soldiers would carry with them. Currently i have it like this: Javelineer 5, Archers 24, Slingers 50.
Thanks in advance
-
2
-
1
.png.3ea5373b17e69d426d78b1bd37839e76.png)
Bug Reporting
in Help & Feedback
Posted · Edited by Grapjas
Incredibly easy, place a few horses inside a map in atlas, save that map and start it up
Maybe i should also mention its not for every horse, just some.
EDIT: also im not sure if its horse or civ/unit dependent, doesnt seem like it.