artoo
-
Posts
161 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by artoo
-
-
Very beautiful artwork, so nice.
-
1
-
-
51 minutes ago, Dizaka said:
What about this? To me it seems like the crossbow was very imprecise. Seems like it was a real threat up close but not really from a distance.
The last video I posted in the last comment also talks about the use of the repeating crossbow.
Their conclusion is, this was a home defense weapon, used at home.
It not powerful enough for war. I would agree with the conclusion.
The Crossbow History vid also in last comment shows near the end the Han system of how they classified crossbows based on draw weight units of 1-10 stone, with 1 stone = ~29.3kg or 64.5 pounds.
So at 10 stone, its a draw weight of ~300 kg or 645 pounds. No human draws that with arm and back muscles. Comparison, an english longbow is at ~200 pounds draw, and this takes years of training, and even if you can draw that, you gotta hit a target with that weight, very hard long training.
The average crossbow at 6 stone was as effective and at least as powerful as a medieval steel crossbow, with higher fire rates per minute. 2-3 people drawing is faster than using a winding mechanism. The medieval European crossbow is sometimes dubbed the sniper rifle of that time.
These were powerful weapons, shooting up 280+ meters.
-
Some conclusions from the above videos.
Well made point, the Han crossbow is more like a ballista, field artillery, likely transported by wagons, and mounted on them.
Excellent defensive weapon, eg from walls, turrets.
Due to so little data, some assumption need to be made, eg they likely used against their main enemy Xiongnu heavy pull crossbows against horse mounted very mobile Xiongnu. High penetration rate of speedy heavy bolts, piercing armor, crushing wooden shields besides piercing.
Accuracy might be similar to very heavy bows at similar range, which an average human can't pull, and release with precision, unless trained for some 10-15 years. A heavy crossbow outranges the bow, depending what bow is mounted.
The model currently used is kind of inaccurate, its not handled with ease like modeled.
The princess camp will take a shot at hiring a Xiongnu warlord in the princess branch, and the champ cav crossbowman is removed. I think it is unlikely the Han used cav crossbow units.
-
-
The Han in current master use the game templates for crossbow, but I added a slight crush damage to the damage, because it is powerful bolts, no arrows.
This should be default in templates for bolt projectile weapons, thus shoushe also has a slight crush damage scorpion, and equivalents should have too.
Overall, Han do in tests very well with infantry, mass bolt weapons and Ji(halberd) in front, and mixed in some archers.
-
1
-
-
-
15 hours ago, Stan` said:
Sadly using prop points has a performance impact so it's discouraged to do it when you don't need them to adjust to the terrain. Someone posted some progress in making an accurate bixie. I'm really busy these days so I didn't have time to follow up. It's in the pipe though.
No problem, maybe someone else takes on the task if time allows.
Its not big important one in my view, but removing the bixies makes these buildings look a bit like the Xiongnu plundered it.
There are a whole list of small issues with the buildings, as Chinese commenter pointed out, eg the little signs on the doors.
-
13 minutes ago, Fabius said:
each gives a selection of auxiliary units specific to a culture Rome would have historically drawn auxiliaries from. Then you present this as a choice to a Roman player. say in phase 2. This allows for strategic trade offs and overall unit diversity without having an over expanded unit roster. Seleucids does this currently with Reform and Traditional armies.
I would this mechanic apply to the "double civs", britons & gauls, successors, greeks. Have one faction, and make the distinction via tech tree in-game. This would cut down playable civs and probably create unique factions, and a few civs less to balance.
-
2
-
-
I'd have a small request.
Since the bixies on CC and Ministry have been deemd inaccurate historicly, would it be possible to make the two props just like a prop with two prop points? Eg a tree could be attached instead of the bixies? Atm, it is a prop with mesh of the bixie for each building.
Would be cool if either the bixie was replaced by something accurate, or freely selectable with a prop point instead of bixie.
I think it looks bad to just remove the bixies and leave empty spots, it makes the entrance so much less inviting.
-
1
-
-
-
3 minutes ago, Dizaka said:
Question: Is the walk speed bonus applies through a global aura or applies to within a range? If it applies to range, does it include hero or exclude them? There are/were situations where walk speed didn't apply to hero and it causes unit speed issues.
The vision and walk speed is global, the promotion aura has radius.
The not ingame princess camp has also range auras, since more camps would stack globally.
The halberd Hero has yet to see real combat against humans, I think the halberd as is might be a very deadly weapon.
-
9 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:
It would be interesting to be able to train troops from the allied player.
Yeah, that's what I meant, impossible to garrison a unit in allied, or enemy buildings without changing diplomatic status.
Btw, Hero Han Xin is a powerful combo along with the princess camp. Maybe atm OP.
-
33 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:
While I could agree on the mentally handicapped part I don't know why you need to call Drumpf a girl.
I am not even sure I can call Greta a girl tbh.
-
-
11 minutes ago, Genava55 said:
So it is not that simple, saying CO2 is good for plants is a no brainer claim from people believing they know better than those studying the topic.
It is that simple, you just don't get that this is all fraud serving a nefarious purpose, like population reduction, just like the plandemic, same perpetrators.
If you think, sending a mentally handicapped girl, by now young woman to do the dirty work, ok, so be it. I find it rotten they abuse a child for that, who drives other children nuts with fear porn.
So explain please, why the peddler of this nonsense buy property at coastal areas, or hang out on Epstein Island for example? Would be first loss with alleged sea level rise. Do you think the peddler of "climate warming" are good people, with noble motives who care about you?
I mean, come on, I am an adult, I don't believe in fairy tales.
-
30 minutes ago, Genava55 said:
The idea that the problem will fade away is naive
The idea that humans would basically be undesirable "useless eaters" as eg Kissinger calls t it, that humans would ruin the earth by contributing C02, so that allegedly sea levels rise, is preposterous and ridiculous.
If this entire nonsense of corruption and fraudulent "science" would be real, not even one of the multi-millionaire BS peddlers would buy insanely expensive property at coastal areas.
That said, please do yourself a favor and research C3 and C4 plants, bottom line, most plants starve, they came to being when CO2 levels were much higher. More CO2 means greener earth, means more food to grow for example in eg desert like areas.
Biggest contributor of C02 are the oceans at ~75%, do you want to cancel oceans? Human contribution is insignificant, and earth is not a closed system like "climate change" postulates.
Climate has always been changing, and will continue to do so, without any humans, it is cyclic.
-
3 minutes ago, Nullus said:
The only issue I see with having a camp for the princess would be that, as I see it, the building is what provides the bonus, so the building could be captured fairly easily, either by the enemy or by a betraying ally. Also, it would be harder to defend. I would think that her husband would want to keep the princess safe within his buildings rather than having her stay in some small camp. Having the princess as a unit would also make it easier to transport her around the map to provide her bonus in different places.
I agree, the sceenshot is the cut down version of the camp, with features removed so to speak.
Its why it was intended to make the camp upgradable to CC after the fiefdom tech is researched.
The camps expands, the princess and husband have children, and founded a dynasty on their own, to eventually challenge the dynasty that spawned them.
QuoteForcing noblemen back to their own fiefdoms. A large number of noblemen were living in the capital Chang'an, lobbying court officials while exploiting the central government's budget to cover their expenses despite already having gained great wealth from their own feudal land tenure taxation. Emperor Wu's new policy dictated that they could no longer live off the government's spending and must leave the capital if lacking any justifiable reason to keep staying;
-
3 minutes ago, Nullus said:
The mechanic wouldn't necessarily be useful in all games, but I think that it would be a nice extra strategy to have available in those games where could be useful.
Yup, I think that the princess camp, could call it diplomatic mission or so, is a very nice incentive in team games.
For the sake of some playing around, here the current capabilities for this weak building.
Don't worry @Stan, the princess is deactivated in master branch, but merged in for eventual use if required.
-
1
-
-
50 minutes ago, Nullus said:
I think that it's already possible to have techs that are dependent upon diplomatic states, such as the allied bonuses for civs. The way I would plan it, the techs wouldn't have to change diplomatic states, they would just provide an encouragement for the other players to change the states themselves.
The problem as is, there is diplomacy panel, and there is game mechanics.
You for example can't sneak a unit in an enemy building, or even neutral one afaik, eg to spy/vision or steal resources, techs whatever. Like real spy units instead of this rudimentary thing thats probably of no real use to bribe traders.
-
2 hours ago, Lopess said:
This camp was very good to congratulate, it reminds me how much it is possible to create new structures using only existing elements. You can create a separate mod with this mechanic, if we think about it there should be an interesting diplomatic mechanic for several civs already present in 0ad, to which in the future you can add them too.
Its pure fun to make tactical units. Would be easy to attach two Yurts instead of arab tents and gear her for Xiongnu interaction.
In my view, the camp mechanics isn't that bad, and would implement a certain accuracy how cadet branches of a royal house come to be, and how rivalries arise from it.
I find this interesting short read, what gave reason behind a princess unit.
-
54 minutes ago, Nullus said:
The benefit of this approach is that it actually would strengthen alliances. Since the civ to which the princess is sent would only get her bonus while they're allied with her player, they would want to keep that alliance. The bonus would have to be good enough to provide a strong incentive, but not a direct offensive military bonus that would make them too strong. This would be a more realistic, organic way to simulate a stronger alliance.
Yes, but for this ti implement, you'd have to be able to query or change diplomacy values via tech modifiers.
Would also offer some interesting mechanics for the ministers to garrison in allied buildings for example.
Or eg princess garrisons enemy building and sabotages eco or so, until she is uncovered and exposed.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:
Guys, the Princess Camp is a fantasy element that takes the civ so far removed from the other civs that you jeopardize their inclusion.
Yes and no. The camp is a means to implement alliance marriage.
If there was diplomacy options, she would take this route.
You can even see her now, and don't have to imagine the beauty.
I think I'll merge the princess branch, I guess the princess can put on very interesting and fun team games.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Radiotraining said:
I don't know if it's just for fun, but in any case better stick with one mechanic, otherwise it becomes a bit cryptic (unless it's meant to be some sort of Easter egg that you unlock with some actions)
The mechanics are simple, you probably missed it.
The Imperial Ministry produces the princess unit(catafalque).
The princess can only upgrade to a princess camp in allied or enemy territory.
The princess camp has an aura for ally and enemy each(wip), produces females and princess.
You can only have one princess until you upgrade her to camp, which let you build one new princess.
The princess camp can be upgraded to a CC if one imperial court exists and the fiefdom tech is researched.
The idea was, that this could be the only means of the Han to expand.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Radiotraining said:
anyway .. I think I missed some steps and maybe my question is stupid but.. why the tent? why not just the princess?
If someone make her a beautiful clothes, the catafalque could be garrisoned with her, or replaced with her. I just thought it might be too much micro?
Han China
in Projects
Posted · Edited by artoo
@wowgetoffyourcellphone
Do you have plans for Xiongnu?
Reason for asking, atm, I added a warlord mercenary for the princess camp, and removed the champ crossbow cav, so Han only have cav archers and dao/sword cav.
From all I red on Han, they simply lacked horses to field large cav armies, which only came in later by literally horse breeding programs.
I would rather make Han depend on Xiongnu than adding these models, but atm, I think they are not in shape to depend on, yet have so very nice artwork.
Would like using Yurt props for the camp instead of adding the props to Han.
Still think the princess would be fun in multiplayer, but seems like a nice mechanic for a scenario or campaign too.