Jump to content

Imperator Ferrum Princeps I

Community Members
  • Posts

    83
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Imperator Ferrum Princeps I

  1. Exactly what I meant ^^

     

    Imo it would not be considered cheating doing this, as it would actually mean you would see less and would pretty much loose the game for you in a serious multiplayer game. It would fall more into the whitehat category I think.

     

    EDIT:

    Besides, editing an xml unit file to make 1st person mode possible would not work in multiplayer I think, as it would just be a local change on your PC.

    • Like 1
  2. Just make it sink into the ground, the opposite of building, and for sack do the sinking in the ground thing but with fire and smoke particles.

     

    I am for this idea as it prevents one from destroying a building right before the 50% capture points line.

  3. Idea: make a carthage version where you play as hamilcar barca, as he never lost a battle but still lost the war, and after that wanted revenge and a rematch, just like the player would. This would set up the 2nd punic war campaign (maybe a mercenary war one in between) really well.

    • Like 1
  4. 13 hours ago, amadeus said:

    Do you mean developers are lazy and are doing anything to get out of a honest's day work ?

    The developers are volunteers that help code the game on their own time, they are not lazy, they just have families and jobs that are more important then getting a small niche feature out a few weeks early.

     

    You say that like they get paid to program this game, they are volunteers and are not obligated to program 0 A.D.

  5. While playing the game I have noticed something very big and historically significant that seems to overlooked in 0 A.D: logistics. I have looked at a past thread about a similar idea but many players did not want to have starving units as it would add to much micromanagement.

    I have an idea for a compromise between the hardcore rts fans and the casual players: a simpler logistical system.

     

    My idea of how it would work is that there would be logistical support units , they would give a "well supplied" aura bonus to armies (and possibly give a weak healing aura too) near it but they would loose health slowly. When their health is depleted they would use the spawn entity on death function to leave behind an "empty" logistical unit. They would then have to travel back to a city to "refill" and become a "full" logistical unit. They would be settable on automatic paths similar to a trader in between a soldier a player specifies (who would probably be one in the center of an army) and they would go back and forth between a food drop site class building and the specified soldier, if that soldier dies then possibly repath to the nearest soldier to the one that died.

  6. On ‎9‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 7:36 PM, SirPope said:

    You don't need to change the templates of 0 AD inheritance does that all ready. You've made all the changes necessary to the base templates that the units of 0 ad inherit.

    template_unit, template_unit_calvary, template_unit_infantry, so on and so forth. The only one you seemed to have missed was the female citizen file. Units still have the armour types and attack types HC has thanks to those files.

    Problems could arise with the AI being adjusted, yes, but 0 AD civ's are Hyrule & Gerudo. I've looked over the AI files and you've just added stuff for the civ's that need it (koroki, gohma). The hero functionality can check and should check if the civ in question has a hero unit that can be chosen anyways (not just for compatibility but also testing new hc civs). I've destroyed the gerudo's with war elephants and that made me happy.

    I still wouldn't implement them into the game anyways. But if someone wants to mess around I told you how. :)

    --

    You'll have to add the barracks back for each civ in config js along with their other structures special structures. The barracks code has been changed apparently.

    Adding BasicSoldier to the classes of unit_infantry allows them to train troops early on but might effect the rest of the AI hence the shouldn't implement them anyways. CitizenSoldiers are basic soldiers anyways.. I don't understand that class name change but you know what your doing I can tell you that much.

    Still does not work, the civil center does not show up a GUI because the female units are still bugged after changing what you said to change. COuld you attach your tinkered file of the template_unit_support_female_citizen?

  7. Is there any way to modify this mod to make it 100% playable with default maps and factions?

    I tried editing it to the point of unhiding the default factions and deleting the .deleted files for the maps but the default civ centers are buggy and do not show any GUI except the "unit card".

  8. Part of the strategy of the game is the fact that, the more forces you send to battle the less you have for economy, so you must choose opportune moments and whether you want to rush the enemy and ruin their early game, or have a strong early economy. Though the current implementation of citizen soldiers needs improving I must agree, as raiding is kind of impractical when almost the whole enemy gathering force has military grade weapons, though the extreme of soldiers being 100% unable to gather kills the promising citizen soldier concept and informal army historical aspect entirely. In my opinion there should be male villagers ingame that you can "upgrade" into different citizen soldiers with resources and time(similar to how seige engines pack and unpack)(would be even better if it required them to be actually garrisoned in a barracks or stable(makes more sense for cavalry) to work but that might be hard to code) and the citizen soldiers be able to downgrade back to male villagers (same goes for female villagers and the very rare female soldiers). Would give the best of both worlds as it would mean raiding is practical again and the citizen soldier aspect is preserved.

  9. Would be interesting, could add a completely new game changing strategy element of disrupting your enemy's teamwork while breaking through the blockade of your city to send for a allied relief army, maybe could also disable the shared vision tech.

    Imo instead of an entire gamemode it should be a setting in the match setup screen.

  10. One day I was looking through the structure tree and I saw that the Indians had a very unique gameplay feature that has potential to make interesting "sub playing styles" for different hero units, similar to in civilization 6 where each leader is like it's own subfaction. I saw something game changing, how the edict of Asoka pillar could only be built if you are playing with Asoka. It may look small, but the potential to have leader-specific buildings/units opens up a whole new untapped gold mine for gameplay richness. One of 0 AD's strong points is how every faction is unique, unlike in civ where each civ only has one unique unit and building, and it would open a new way to play if each hero unit had it's own unique gameplay as such. For example, imagine if a player decided to play as a faction, and they had their normal unique gameplay style for using that faction, but then they would have the strategic choice of choosing which hero to play, as each hero would have it's own playing style more then just it's auras/small bonuses and standard combat stats, but it's own unique units/buildings you can and cannot build when he is alive as a small example scratching the surface of the potential.

    I feel this feature would make the gameplay even more rich and create more new playing strategies.

    • Like 3
×
×
  • Create New...