[Suggestions for 0 A.D.]

I like how diverse the civilizations are, each having a unique look and feel. It was very surprising to me to find out that although they have units that look very different they are exactly the same when it comes to stats. That is, a gallic spearman will have the exact same stats as the roman triarii or the athenian hoplite, all they differ in is the looks and perhaps the training cost. I think this is confusing and a missed opportunity, although it does make the game simpler. Effectively, the difference between civilizations comes down to the list of unit classes they can train, which is even less difference than AoE2 civilizations had, where different civilizations would differ in the available levels of upgrades for certain units and available techs.
I know that introducing unique stats for each civilizations' units would be a *huge* balancing effort but it would add a lot of value and would make choosing a civilization to play with more than a matter of preference on available unit classes and look. I tried to find topics that discussed this in the pass but could find nothing. What is the consensus/opinion on this?

Another pet peeve of mine is consistency. For example the Macedonian's Companion Cavalry is a champion while the Seleucid's one is just a citizen cavalry, although the units are called the same and almost look the same. I realize that two identical spear champion cavalry for the Seleucids would make no sense (they already have the Catahpracts). This is where my previous point comes in. If each unit had unique stats then the Companion Cavalry could be the same in both civilizations and the Seleucids would have access to both the Companion Cavalry and the Cataphracts which could be a unit with slightly different stats and perhaps different strategic relevance (e.g. better armored but slower and more expensive cavalry then the Companion Cavalry). Similarly some civilizations have units that look different but have the very same stats and cost (e.g. the two different Kushite champion swordsmen).

Any thoughts?

[Suggestions for 0 A.D.]

On 7/27/2018 at 6:38 PM, Genava55 said:

I have a vague idea about an economic + slave system + mercenaries. It is starting with the introduction a new resource: money/gold.

My idea is that each factions can build different buildings permitting the production of specific goods (ceramic, transformed food, bronze dishes, etc.) and each goods need a specific quantity of raw material (food, wood, metal or stone). Each building need to be connected with a market or a port to sold your product which give you a quantity in coins/gold. The interest for the player is firstly a capital gain (the product sold gives a higher value in gold than if you would have sold the raw material). Finally, the buildings need workers to be efficient and productive. You need to use a part of your population, putting them in the buildings to work.

My second idea is a slave system. I have seen that it was already suggested before. In this case, I suggest it because it fit well with the previous idea. The player can use money/gold to buy slaves, but to be interesting it should have an advantage. Either a better productivity (a slave work harder and longer) or either to be not included in the population account (I'm not in favor of this one since a slave needs to be feed and to be housed). The backslash: the slaves can't protect buildings from conversion, can't fight, can't build anything and maybe can be stolen.

My third idea is to pay all the mercenaries in coins/gold with the advantage of a fast training. They should be more expensive than normal units and maybe with a temporary limit (after 3 min they are disbanded if you don't pay again for example).

Why am I suggesting a money system? To give the possibility to players to focus on a economic system with good advantages but with increasing risk since opponents could focus on a few buildings to disturb the resources of the player. We can even force the players to build the productive buildings far enough of the market. It also increases the motivation for players to scout the opponent's base.

This is a very elaborate and complex economic system. Consider that this is an RTS and you would have to go through all this trouble in *every* match, effectively making quick matches impossible. It's also an awful lot to pay attention to requiring an insane  amount of clicking.
Such an economic system might be fine in a slow paced turn based strategy where you play a match for hours or days on but in a fast paced RTS 4 kinds of resources is as complex I would ever go.