Wijitmaker
-
Posts
9.663 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Posts posted by Wijitmaker
-
-
Even if you take nothing else of what i suggest on board at least stop using the word slaves!
I agree, not all civilizations represented in the game had such larger percentage of their population as slaves, such as the Romans and Persians. That was one reason why we chose to use the word citizen instead of slaves. So, I'll call them citizens.
By the way, what are the chances of a radical system like this being implemented, and what could I do to help accomplish it (i'm not really a modder of games).It could almost be implemented entirely with modifying lots of xml files. One might need some help setting up the auto generation of citizens. Also there is some logic needed to 'transform' entities when 'trained' in structures. Perhaps some GUI elements as well. It wouldn't be simple, but it wouldn't to laborious I think.
I think the biggest hurdle one will have is convincing the team that it is a good idea, when in doubt the team tends to do things like the Age of Empires because that is mainly the audience that will be playing this game. It can be done though. I would suggest making a clear and objective list of pros and cons. Also create a little mini document that details all the effects this would have on the game inside and out. How would food effect technologies? How is food collected? What would the interface of the UI look like to train the citizens? What structures would it require and what actions would each structure take? How does it (or does it at all) fit in with game design elements like auras, citizen soldiers, trading, building structures, promotions, heroes... etc (see here: http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Design_Document & http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/XML.Entity - Note not all documents are up to date with the changes the team has made in the last several years - I'm sure they will correct you as you go).
The output of this effort would give the team a good picture of what the risk/rewards of doing a system like this is and give them the ability to estimate workload for such a task.
Good luck
-
That is a really neat idea! Very interesting and fits well with the citizen soldier concept. You could arm the basic citizen solder with a pitchfork and rocks or something if ever attacked (making them primarily a econ unit. Rather than battle experience to make the jump from basic to advanced, you could do just as you suggest. Make them pay for training at a barracks by "garrisoning" the unit there. Advancement from advanced to elite would be through experience still.
Off the top of my head, the main gripe I could think of is that it would be a little tedious to micromanage. A game designer needs to consider what they want players to spend their time/clicks doing. Do you want players to spend their time tasking their slaves/citizens to a barracks to "train" or would you want them to spend more time engaging in other activities like battle tactics?
I like the idea of specialist citizens. It offers the players choices on how to manage their economy and adds strategy and depth.
I'm not sure it would be a good idea to have citizens/slaves to always appear automatically at a constant rate. Perhaps have a system similar to civilization. The rate at which food is collected would be linked to the rate your population would increase. Food would perhaps have to then be generated from resources that provide a constant regenerative source of food (farms, corrals, fishing). Though bumps in the rate might occur with hunting. Or, maybe food could solely be used to "generate" citizens/slaves. Perhaps every increment of 100 units of food collected, you automatically get a new citizen/slave (until you hit a cap - necessary for system requirements). Although... how would you "buy" a horse, camel, elephant. Maybe you could queue it and instead of 100 food automatically going to a human, it would instead use the next 200 food (for example) to purchase a horse that would be available for someone to train with at your barracks?
Neat idea, just doing some brainstorming
-
Celts are supposed to be weak in siege (though have a sufficiently strong turf wall - Julius liked them so much he started using them)Celts - not enough siege power. -
Yep, that would work too
-
Looking good
Hey, this graphical representation would be great for displaying a trader's path between a market/dock and destination. It would default to the shortest path.
You could also perhaps allow the player to select a portion of the line to click and drag (creating a waypoint) if you wanted the trader to go another way besides default (kinda like google maps).
-
I like the assyrian ram, if it doesn't work for the persians it might be a worthy special unit:
-
Maybe an alternative feature would be the ability to import a bitmap as the heightmap? Convert the image to greyscale and paint out the seas and clouds etc in Photoshop, then tell Atlas to load it to replace the current map's elevation, then the outline will be visible and you can manually adjust the terrain as necessary.
ScEd (the predecessor to Atlas) had this functionality. I had a variety of images that I got years ago. I converted them to black and white height maps and saved maps as in the old .psm format (I think that is what it was? - atlas used to read this format). All those old real word maps were in a folder for years. Since your asking about them, I guess they are gone. Images were made from satellite imagery like the stuff found here:
http://glcf.umiacs.umd.edu/data/srtm/
more options here:
-
To play devil's advocate, the AoE design time has tried innovative things in the past (AOE3) and it wasn't well received. Bruce Shelly even calling AOE3 a mistake.The problem is that the core gameplay has NO innovation.I'll ask a hypothetical question: What is the balance between offering something new to players that is innovative vs. familiar? From reading the comments here, AOEO appears to be all too familiar (and in a reduced state) - AOE3 is too different. What does it take to make you happy?
-
Sarmatians are a pretty sweet civ. The Roxolani Cavalry was slated to be a super unit for the Dacians in Part II.
Michael The Great, where does your interest in the Sarmatians/Schythians come from? Why do you think they would be a good civ to add in 0 A.D.? What makes them unique from the other civs?
-
Maybe your talking about LOD models and mip-maps on textures.
-
Ah, sorry - here you go:
-
Rather than re-inventing the wheel for the proposed entity editor (though it would be nice to have it integrated into atlas and works on all OSs), isn't there software out there (perhaps even open source) that is capable of generating forms that can open/save xml file? After doing a quick google search... for example something like this:
http://www.orbeon.com/forms/orbeon-form-builder
or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_InfoPath
or
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/OOo3_User_Guides/Writer_Guide/XForms
Would that be worth looking into?
-
5 of the 6 civs are already done. Example:
http://www.wildfiregames.com/users/files/docs/celt_male.txt
http://www.wildfiregames.com/users/files/docs/celt_fem.txt
Taken from some research done years ago that can be found here:
http://www.wildfiregames.com/users/files/docs/names.zip
Carthage could be picked up from something like this: http://babynamesworld.parentsconnect.com/phoenician-names.html
Names could be done in a few different ways:
First Name <son of> Father's Name
First Name, Last Name
First Name <of> Town Name
Historians would probably be better to say which is most appropriate for which civ.
-
I think that is a good idea. How many units were promoted to advanced and elite, that would be good.What about promotions?Another idea that kind of goes along with that... back in the day, we had an idea to randomly generate a name for each human in the game (to encourage players to form an attachment with their units, to personalize them, and not encourage using units as fodder
- use them as a real good general would). If this was re-implimented, it would be fun to see which unit had the most kills in the summary screen. Perhaps it was your champion Cachamwri Ap Pwyll or maybe it was your opponents champion Antaeus Thetis? -
Hi Sylvain. It looks like Philip is about to post, so I'll leave the technical analysis for him
From a non-programmer point of view, I could see this working well in a static environment, but 0 A.D.'s world is very dynamic with entities moving, new buildings being constructed, trees being cut down... etc. I'm not sure how difficult it would be to update the areas?Talking about navigation meshes, anyone could point me to a good article ?Here are some articles:
http://www.ai-blog.net/archives/000152.html <= lots of links about halfway down the page
Here are some old articles:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3096/toward_more_realistic_pathfinding.php
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3317/smart_move_intelligent_.php
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/2738/evolving_pathfinding_algorithms_.php
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3137/profiling_data_analysis_.php?page=2
An additional resource is that we have had a former SSSI employee (Dan Higgins aka Major Glory) drop by the forums in the past and I'm sure he would be available to bounce some ideas off of. This was his last piece of advice to us:
What I'd suggest for pathfinding is the following:1) Read my articles on pathfinding in AI Wisdom (3 in there) and my terrain analysis article in Game Programming Gems 3 (Sneak into Barnes & Noble, get a coffee and a chair. =)
2) First, and most importantly is the low-level pathfinder. Nail that down using some of the optimization techniques I discussed. Spliting over time is a big task, so just use an instantaneous path, but using some of the "beating memset" techniques for clearing the pathfinder for the next guy.
3) After that's great, and terrain analysis is in (see gems 3), use the terrain information to build a high-level pathfinding engine. Basically, put a grid over the terrain regions, then use a "graph" type of A*.. instead of 8 adjacencys, there are X number. One day, I'll write an article on this.. its long and complex, but is one of the keys to having hundreds of units pathfinding over long distances.
An idea of time: Took me a weekend to get pathfinding working... took me 9 months to optimize it to hard-core RTS level where pathfinding was never a performance issue. Again, you probably don't need it that optimized, just 100% reliable, never freezing the game, and applying a high-level system to even an instantaneous system will provide mega performance benifits.
-
To further distinguish player from resource entities on the minimap - would there perhaps be a way to draw different pixel shapes rather than have them all as squares?
-
I like the second - the burn helps the contrast over both dark colored terrains and the light colored terrains. Though, I guess it depends if you intentionally want it subtle or not.
-
That was originally done to help to visually differentiate from celt in the folder/file structures. Here is the decoder:kart? Why not cart? hmmmbrit - britons
celt - celt
gaul - gallic
hele - hellenes
iber - iberians
kart - carthaginians
mace - macedonians
pers - persian
pole - poleis
rome - roman
-
Nice work Philip. I alpha gradient too. For reference, here is an example of how Rise of Nations did territories in the game view.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_TEqMaTKLZfY/TFcZXTZqwRI/AAAAAAAACAY/IlMAHi6bIJA/s1600/r3.jpg
-
Is it possible to capitalize the D in this topic title?
-
Ambush and Iberians? Easy, all other nations have increased the cost of movement through forest terrain, Iberians not.
Exactly, a penalty on movement speeds
How dense do the trees need to be for an area to be considered a forest?Let me preface by saying: I think in terms of tiles, and I'm not sure if that is an appropriate way to think about this matter in a 3d environment. So take this for what it is worth.
A tile would be defined as a forest tile under 2 optional conditions:
1) has a tree on it
AND
2) all adjacent tiles have trees on them
This would automatically change the primary texture of the terrain tile to "forest floor" designated by the biome chosen for the map. This would is key for automatic definition of a forest in random maps.
OR
3) Map maker paints the "forest" floor texture in Atlas
This would get a little bit fuzzy because what happens when trees are cut down? Does the tile texture update to inherit the secondary non-forest floor texture? In AOK, I think I remember the texture remaining, but the tile was passable. I'm sure you guys could figure out some clever solution here.
A note about the ranger unit in battle for middle earth that I referenced. I'm not sure if you have played the game, but they were a unit that if remained motionless and among the trees, they would become invisible to other players (ideal for ambushing). To the player that owned the invisible unit, it would fade in and out to show it's invisbleness (if that is a word
). That would be perfect for the Iberians. Additionally, Iberians would have the added benefit of cavalry in forest, where most other civs/factions it would only be infantry allowed. -
This capability would indeed be welcomed for the Iberians:what about ambush in forest? will it be possible with new implementation of pathfinding?
"Hero" Aura: "Tactica Guerrilla": <(TAHK-tee-kah gay-REE-yah); means: guerrilla tactics> The Iberians were singularly well known for their use of guerrilla war tactics and the concept of fighting in this fashion came from them; the word itself being derived from medieval Spanish. Time and time again they sucked their enemies into ambuscades. Effect: The Hero and any units grouped with him are invisible to enemies when idle or moving. They will only become visible when performing an action, such as attacking an opponent. Furthermore, invisible units (like units concealed in forests) aren't considered when determining if a player has been wiped off the map.Here are some other comments on forest terrains: http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/XML%3A_Terrain
Attached is an old image too for what it is worth
The ranger unit in Battle for Middle Earth would be a good example of the behavior of Iberian units in the guerrilla use.
-
0 A.D. may want that for seafaring ships anyway - not just for aircraft.QUOTESome cases might want slightly different movement algorithms
-
Cool. What size do you need the icons and which folder are they in? For the life of me I can't find it and I'm getting tired (it's late here--2 AM). Also, it would be cool to move all the icons into one ribbon along the top, like the mockup. Maybe use dividers to separate types of tabs.
They should all be here:
http://trac.wildfiregames.com/browser/ps/trunk/binaries/data/tools/atlas
Radical troop training idea
in General Discussion
Posted
Few more things to consider. Would advanced (in your model - units that were trained), elite (units that gain greater stats through experience) soldiers still have an economic purpose? Right now they do, just not as efficient as a basic citizen soldier (freshly created unit). I believe they should, as a fall back option. Or could a unit have multiple training - both military and economic? Would a generic commoner have any economic or military capability without any training?
If the training wasn't done at a structure, and instead done by clicking on a single unit then doing the "training/upgrade" specialization from there - it would be a similar idea to Westwood Command and Conquer RTS games and later the same studio that EA bought and made Battle for Middle Earth. Basically your applying a tech through means of garrisoning a unit in a structure for a period of time.