nifa

I think some symbols could spice things up and consume the empty space between the buttons. e.g. a sword for single player, crossed swords for multiplayer, two gears for options, a door for exit, a book for learn to play etc.

I tried to represent a roman castrum, so I think the fortress makes more sense there, also the civic center looks too big in there. But if it works better in another way I'm also fine with it I don't have much freetime and I won't be active so much, so feel free to improve the map however you want (I won't be able add the new terrains as well). I'm kinda proud that it get's some recognition anyway Thanks a lot!

Why only at the borders of the forest, not inside? This way it looks strange once you cut the wood. Is it because of performance? I think it would also look better if there wasn't such a hard line of border-marking bushes, but rather some kind of fluid transition

I think that dead wood could be a nice addition to make forests more realistic. Something like tree stumps, fallen trees, burnt trees from lightning, dead trees. At least for European forests, they have never been so "clean" as they are today and that's because of forest industry. I know it's partly included in other trees but I think it could have its own category. I tried to use a lot of that for my limes map: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/36065-new-scenario-map-the-limes/?do=findComment&comment=415734

Thanks, I'm happy you liked it! Sure let me know what you have in mind. That one looks like I forgot a texture behind the stones:D @wowgetoffyourcellphone I didn't know people are interested, but in this case I'll try to update it. Do I have to do that in altas or are you using a script or how is it done?

If it's possible to add the new suebian buildings, that'd be nice, but apart from that I'm looking forward to a soon release!

Sounds good to me. A shooting angle of maybe 45 degrees for artillery on ships without turning might be okay as well. Less turning means more realistic battles (also slower turning but that's a different story). A catapult shooting both in the direction of the front and the back is unrealistic, might be hitting the own sails, so there would be a need to turn. We would need to check for historical accuracy, what the exact positions would be for each unique ship. Whether they were fighting to the front, to the side.. maybe both, or to the back... and with how many on each side

if there is a plan to distinguish between arrow-attacks (archers) and bolt-attacks (catapult), then the ships shouldn't turn for attacking with arrows. Let's say soldiers, citizens, elephants, heros, and fishing boats are attacked with arrows, while buildings, siege and bigger boats are attacked with bolts. Seems weird if the whole ship is turned to attack a single soldier standing on the beach. They should be able to shoot in any direction then.

I'm sorry if I missed a previous discussion, but is it common desire that rams can attack rams and destroy them in 5 sec while they prefer attacking a house instead of fighting back?

Maybe this could be something for the Republican Romans in DE to differ from the Imperial Romans? @wowgetoffyourcellphone

Wie_die_Germanen_gewohnt_haben_(CC_BY-SA_4.0).webm The farm houses in lower saxony are still very similar until today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_German_house Long story short, historically corrals didn't exist, they lived together with their animals. I didn't find this kind of living in any other culture, except maybe the vikings (who are also considered to be germans in the broadly sense). I think the Gauls didn't have these? Maybe someone has a better insight in other cultures? It could somehow distinguish the gauls from the germanic tribes, otherwise they'd be too similar

The Longhouse/byre-dwelling (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byre-dwelling) is something unique to the germanic tribes. Other cultures didn't have animals and people literally under one roof. Maybe it could be available in the city phase. And for the village phase there could be the chicken coop. So you would start with the coop and chickens in village phase, and then build the longhouse in city phase (or town phase) to produce cows, pigs etc and get an extra population bonus. btw. what's the "great hall" building above? I don't get it Also a nice idea! the coop could also be a feature in the farm building, only visual

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Arch%C3%A4ologisches_Freilichtmuseum_Funkenburg?uselang=de some pictures from an open air museum (seems more like a storage than a coop)

There is also a chicken coop in Opfermoor Vogtei, on stilts and with wicker instead of a wall

those buildings look really nice! germanic longhouses had the entrance on the side and were split into two halfes with people living on the one side and animals on the other. They were long and big in size and with the roof nearly until the ground. I think this could be a nice special building (like the appartment buildings of the romans or carthagians), with a bigger population bonus and animal corral combined. Also I noticed the chicken coop/ henhouse on stilts (like in the background on those pictures). Would be a nice addition too. It would give individuality to the germanics but I understand if it breaks the balance/ scale..

or only show the helmets? Less gpu intensive, less violent, easy to count.. Or maybe other props like sword/shield? I just don't know what to do with the units without those things

could be useful to prevent misclicks

Saturday it's 10 years that you joined the forum, enjoy your well deserved rest

Thank you for your fast reply, the water is back:) but there now is quite a different between with and without GLSL, is that how it should be? Yes, I think so too, especially in combination with high quality shadows

Nice, just found out that it's working with my other graphic card, but not with the onboard graphic, idk if that's helpful but then I get this with my the other with my external gpu:

I get this error on the map "oceanside": This is with GLSL disabled: Did I do something wrong? Apart from that, thanks, everything else is looking really nice:)

I think "unknown" should be a new diplomatic status. Not only hide the civ, also make all other interactions impossible, like no tribute, no spies, maybe hide their borders etc..

I had some ideas, it's not a complete suggestion but maybe i can get the discussion running:) Right now there are only 3 kind of diplomatic relations, which are Neutral, Enemy and Ally. I think it might be nice to add "unknown", as I've seen people many people requesting here on the forum. Further, right now all three diplomatic relations are balanced. Adding uneven relations, like Vassal state / Hegemonic state could add some dynamics to the gameplay. The idea is, that when you have heavily damaged an opponent, you can make him your vassal and focus on other opponents, while still being able to have some control over him. On the other hand the vassal has the opportunity to come back to power in later game. As far as i see in alpha 24 there are three variables to be controlled, which are whether attack is possible, shared vision and shared dropsites. More possible variables could be: Territory invasion: Make it unpossible to move units into another players territory (unless support units). This could also prevent some sneaky moves Continious tribute: Paying a percentage of all gathered resources (not at once, but like out of 10 wood gathered 1 goes to the hegemonic power) Production ban on siege: Make it impossible to produce rams, catapults etc In the end this could look like this: This is only a basic idea, other ideas are welcome:) Allied and team might be one too much, out of Protectorate and vassal state one might be enough too. Historical correctness might be improved. So far all relations only have effects between the two parties, maybe an effect on the relation with others is desired, like abolishing trade with a third party and so on

nice work I think the windmill, the forge and the saw mill are my favourites. I wonder why the fortress towers have glass doors to the outside, that seems a little unpractical

I agree with Sundiata also I don't see why it should make an opinion more important how good you are in playing or what rank you have