sphyrth

Could "Almost everything has a Wood cost" be another factor? @wowgetoffyourcellphone said that it's one of the reasons he made DE (too lazy to find the source, it's in the "0 A.D. in Youtube Thread".

The concept is indeed simple. "Keep your farms attended or else." Well, simple until a Raiding Party comes in. "Haha! Watch your farms rot while you stay in your buildings cowering in fear." I kinda like the system.

Well, there you go. Maps affecting gameplay... some favoring corrals, and others favoring farms.

Okay, let's talk about @wowgetoffyourcellphone I like this idea because of a certain implication. If you're a player like me, I favor map exploration. Asides from finding your enemy's farm and lumbercamps, and map treasures (which I turn off by default) I don't find map exploration very rewarding. From watching Aoe2 commentators, scouting the map for your first sheep/boars is very vital and encourages players to scout (both for animals and relics). For now, we have fruit trees and fruit bushes for that... but all of it is practically given by default in every starting match... your only real strategy is the build order (gather first or build first). I believe wow's suggestion gives such a rewarding feeling of possibly having an advantage against your enemy, and exploring the map.

I think he's become a JeanClaude fan. Now for my own. I really hope I can have my own room and not have my dogs ruin the recording.

Sooner or later I might do commentaries on replays that the Anavultus has already covered. There's just a few after all.

I'm getting too much emotional stress with the Citizen Soldiers discussion (Remove... Revamp... Remove... Revamp). When it comes to two types of Farms: Corral? Prevent cav rushing? Don't make them available in yhe CC is my suggestion. But there's something I'm quitenot getting: Cav Rushing (fast attack) is the ONLY option... but then gathering ONLY is better than gather + attack. I mean, what?

I can't really comment any further from how pyrogenesis "looks" because that can change. Well, gameplay can change, features can change, and maybe even its concept of RTS can change... just like any other engine. The only real difference I can point to is Open Source vs. Proprietary. People with Free Time vs. People who get paid.

Pyrogenesis used to be proprietary, and Bang! is still proprietary.

The only middle ground I can see is that Cavs shouldn't be available on the Civic Center. Only then will the brokenness of the Citizen Soldiers will be the point of discussion.

Alpha 21 has both Citizen-Soldier Mercs and Champion Mercs. I didn't even know that it was planned as a in-between type of unit. If that were the case, then the Logical Progression of Units might work: Village Phase Citizen Soldiers, Town Phase Mercs, and City Phase Champs. If you plan to add a Nation Phase or something like in DE, I believe that's the best phase to put in the Heroes. And, yeah. Gameplay-wise I thought that Mercs are just units that replace their Food Cost with Metal.

I think "The Corral Argument" is sufficient for me to vote for "No".

Hey! What do you know, I got the club thing right.... except for the spiked part.

Bumping this thread so you guys could check if I got it right: Athenians - Owl of Athena Britons - Battersea Shield Carthaginians - Sign of Tanit (No Crescent Variation) Gauls - Celtic Circle (Or Celtic Knot, I'm still not sure) Macedonians - Vergina Sun Mauryans - Lotus Flower Persians - Faravahar (Old Version - that's why the human figure isn't there) Ptolemies - Eagle of Zeus Romans - Capitoline Wolves (I'm not sure if they are the legendary wolves, or why there has to be two of them) Seleucids - Royal Anchor Spartans - Lambda Blazon Thebans - Spiked Club (Yeah, go ahead and laugh because it looks like a club to me. I just put it in here because it's in the source)

Map Design can affect gameplay. I'm imagining a moidified Arcropolis Bay. Think of a Valley with Metal and Stone mines in it. And the hills that make up that valley are quite barren. Although the valley has your important resources, controlling the hills is a bigger priority even if there are no resources in them.

Not exactly 0 A.D., but he addresses the implementation of round-based structures and how he thinks it causes an imbalance. Whether the imbalance is good or not is a matter of debate. But correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the Brythonic Civc Center have less hit/def points?

Lol. I guess I did it again. Here's what I can say. When I was starting out with 0 A.D., I did have trouble finding my own starting units: women are quite tiny, and the only easy way to find my own units is by looking at their shields (even now, Carthage's shields are easiest to pick up). As time goes by, as I was learning the game, I have no problem finding my units even if they're in the middle of a fighthing mosh pit. So learning can be a factor to which you can distinguish units in a game. My only real pet peeve is that some color palettes blend too much with the surroundings and the mini-map (green, orange, black, and even white). The irony of it all is that I think Strike Tactics is currently failing at its own thesis (I will not give it a pass even if it's pre-alpha). Looking at the first video in the OP: the color of the units are so similar that it's easy to lose track what's going on... even if I can differentiate between the economy and the military units. With all units moving around like that it's just messy for my eyes.

True. 0 A.D. was the prime example given. He also said (in the same article) that AoE3 fell into the same trap. And Starcraft II was more successful in this area.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone Woops! Sorry 'bout that. I should've just linked that particular devlog myself. Thanks @Grugnas for doing so.

If you remember Feudal Wars (and how it failed), the main developer didn't give up trying to make a great RTS. I'll try my best to follow this game... especially the dev logs. It has one entry where he praised 0 A.D.'s artistic realism while stating that it has become detrimental to gameplay (Forum-ception: His article quoted a thread on this forum, and now I'm indirectly quoting him back).

Before I get confused with all the forks in the discussion, let me just say that I hope you guys don't "over-modernize" this game. Judging from the comments on the recent youtube videos, there are still classic RTS fans out there who just "discovered" 0 A.D. I really hope you find that sweet-spot of preserving the "classic" feel of the game while bringing good innovations.

Lol sure. I even forgot that you changed your name back before I was even posting videos.

Lion letting me do the honors even though he got to watch it first Here's my recent one.

My main problem with Stone and Metal being too close to the Civic Center is that a lot of new players think that those things are necessary to be gathered immediately (which they are not). I'm talking from experience and from watching youtube players who are new to the game. Having some basic Food and Wood resources nearer while having the other resource types a bit farther from your main base might also create a tutorial-esque thing for new players: "Oh, I need Stone and Metal to advance / get this type of unit? But I don't see that here. Maybe I have to search the map for it."

Man, I didn't know that I was touching on another trivial-but-sensitive sibject. Basically, we're dealing with 2 traditions based pn word preference. I happen to belong to the "Faction" tradition because I was relying on the manual. If I was an AoE player, then I would probably be in the "Civilization" tradition... which majority of the initial devs belong to (which also explains why the terms is used in-game). We might be dealing with a little problem here. 0 A.D. places these Warring Factions (Village Phase) while giving them technologies that made them Established Civilizations... even to the Empire level. About traditional terms like "aging up", "Town Center", and lumbercamp... it's interesting for me to see that nobody's using the term "Castle". I mean "Fortress" is the only thing I see used natively in the game.