Fabius
-
Posts
357 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Fabius
-
-
I want to see new features and a breaking of the status quo. The only way forward is to bite the proverbial bullet and assume you cannot please everyone. Whats more, there ought to be more cohesion and unification around progress, eg if an idea is put forward discuss and if it is reasonable accept it and pass it on to whoever has the coding skill to make it happen. You can't all do your own merry thing and expect your game to survive. lists, discussions, action, progress is what you need. And a unification of vision
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, AIEND said:
I talked about this before, soldiers should not get armor and appearance changes, but only get combat experience - single damage, attack frequency, hit rate, block (melee defense).
The reason they get armour is because in this era the more elite soldiers could afford to buy their own gear and so it is reasonable that they get better armour the more experienced they get. Currently it is excruciatingly hard to make meaningful use of that experience bonus unless you are a Greek state with hoplite tradition or have idle troops in a barracks for 4 minutes.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Gurken Khan said:
@Fabius Persians also have a unique building with an extra benefit.
True, I had forgotten that. Well how about the Senate house for Rome then? And other factions too if they happen to have a building of sorts for such things
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:
full merc gold rush XD
Every Carthaginian players dream map
-
1
-
-
On 19/04/2022 at 1:21 AM, Philip the Swaggerless said:
Any hero that can be produced in the CC can be produced sooner. Currently, by the time you make the building for the hero, and then make the hero, the big p3 fight is starting. If you can train the hero from the CC then maybe you can at least get a little eco benefit before all your soldiers go to fight. I know I would try it.
This is one very nice thing about Selucids and Ptolomies, you can immediately have a hero to lead your forces to battle, whats more they have an elephant hero that can level a civic center by itself if properly protected. Every other civ has to build a silly fort which costs a lot and takes an age. At least the Spartans, Athenians and Gauls have an easier time of things with unique buildings, I think Mauryas as well. But the others are stuck building forts
-
1
-
-
I believe the traction trebuchet originated in Asia and then made its way down to middle east and the eastern Romans who adopted it in part i think because it proved more reliable. The Romans liked using them for field battles among other things.
Then later on it became the counterweight trebuchet.
-
17 minutes ago, AIEND said:
Generally speaking, I think that the ballista is a big one, a bolt shooter that can shoot rocks, and there is no difference between the two in terms of shooting javelins.
I guess that's why the Ballista was eventually phased out as it was more complicated and less convenient for throwing large incendiaries, and the Onager or Trebuchat eventually took over its ability to fire rocks.Yes, Torsion weapons were generally a lot more complicated to build and maintain, and traction trebuchets and the later counterweight trebuchet proved much more useful and easier to build, and they could also be built larger so as to threaten previously impregnable fortifications.
-
It largely comes down to what would be most effective and simple to use.
-
2 minutes ago, AIEND said:
Is there any real-world evidence of such a coating? Also if it's just firing a javelin that burns at the front, the ballista probably won't be any more effective than a bolt shooter, can it fire a can of oil or a fireball made of hay?
A bolt shooter is in the same category as a ballista, I don't think it can shoot fireballs, though maybe flaming jars would work, sling arm catapulst would be a better choice for that. Also later era Roman bolt shooters used mostly metal components, so they could easily do incendiary bolts if necessary.
-
Just now, Fabius said:
metal plating, also its a long bolt so the flaming part is likely sticking out in front and not on the actual framework. Same way that incendiary arrows would work except on a larger scale.
Also they would light and fire very close together so it probably would not have time to catch fire. Overall a fire pot would be a much more effective way to set something on fire than arrows.
-
1 minute ago, AIEND said:
I have a question, how does the ballista fire the incendiary? Because its track is wooden, it will ignite.
metal plating, also its a long bolt so the flaming part is likely sticking out in front and not on the actual framework. Same way that incendiary arrows would work except on a larger scale.
-
2 minutes ago, Fabius said:
For use against siege yes, we need to be careful with ranged units though. This is why i prefer to add it to catapults, one because ranged units already have a lot going for them. Catapults do not.
Two because I would like to have a reason to enjoy using catapults again, and three for tactical diversity.
-
1
-
-
Just now, AIEND said:
The first thing to do is to add flaming arrows to the archer.
For use against siege yes, we need to be careful with ranged units though. This is why i prefer to add it to catapults, one because ranged units already have a lot going for them. Catapults do not.
-
1
-
-
Just now, soloooy0 said:
one thing that would be important, is that the units cannot see behind the walls, to help the defenses and that the siege towers have greater utility to be able to see over the walls.
Is that possible to code for?
-
Chiefly I would like to see it as a technology for those civs with catapults. Basically apply fire debuff to targets within a given radius.
-
1
-
-
This bring me back to the idea that utilising the fire mechanic from Iberian cavalry could open up some interesting diversification. Nobody has a monopoly on fire, I think it would be interesting to have a diversification in the incendiary department.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, AIEND said:
Onager or Trebuchat usually project a clay pot filled with oil, which is also relatively safe.
True, and would be devastating against a wooden structure.
-
2
-
-
4 minutes ago, alre said:
a catabult (ballista) is basically a big bow that uses torsion instead of flection, you can aim it the same way as a normal sized bow. in its size I mean.
the picture you posted depicts an onager, also called catapult, but not of the tipe you would use on a ship. a bolt shooter would be more useful than that.
A bolt shooter would be a safer option for shooting flaming projectiles.
-
Just now, AIEND said:
In fact, there is a question, what kind of catapult is installed on the warship, I have the impression that this kind of catapult is smaller and is used more.
A good point, though I belive this type was still quite accurate, the Trebuchat which also uses the sling arm was noted for being quite accurate as well. In rough seas though pretty much anything will be inaccurate, it must also be noted that in that age most battles would have been fought in calm weather and near the coast, so accuracy would not really be an issue.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, AIEND said:
The catapult is not an artillery piece, the stone it fires does not have such high kinetic energy, it cannot easily penetrate the deck and hull, and the catapult cannot shoot directly.
Catapults are actually more useful to throw incendiary objects to burn ships than to fire rocks.The ballista can fire stones directly, all the catapults in the game follow this design. So yes they would actually count as artillery. While it may not be really possible to sink a ship with one mounted on a ship it would still do significant damage to a ships superstructure.
-
8 minutes ago, AIEND said:
I don't think tomahawks have an advantage over swords when it comes to destroying sturdy machines (they're not firewood in your backyard) to be worth our attention.
The force exerted by an axe stroke versus that of a sword stroke is significantly different, an axe head will generate much more damage than a sword stroke will. It comes down to the design of each. An axe head is designed to generate high cutting damage in a small area, a sword will generate cutting power over a much broader area but has much less weight concentration.
-
Just now, AIEND said:
If you have used maces and poleaxes, you will find that they are specially designed to attack people and are not as heavy as hammers and axes which are professional tools. It's no better for demolishing buildings or siege machines than a sword.
In reality, maceman and axeman attack siege machines in the same way as other melee infantry - killing their operators.Fair point, I would argue axes should have a stronger bonus since they can comfortably threaten both man and machine at once
-
3 minutes ago, AIEND said:
It only took me half an hour to add a new damage type to the mod, and most of the time, you just need to copy/paste repeatedly between various templates.
The new damage types allow us to be more flexible when designing stats. For example, we can completely use the "smash" type of slinger's damage, and let the maceman's damage be completely "thump" type. Don't worry that this value will be too high to affect buildings and siege weapons.
With all respect there are only really three ways to inflict damage, pierce, hack/slash and bludgeon/crush, if you want to add permutations of those you would need to add resistances for them which means things get complicated quickly. Your best option is to use damage modifiers. Its simple and allows for alterations using the existing foundations without bloating things.
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Outis said:
Can we mitigate this by giving siege units a low base damage and a large bonus damage to buildings?
I think mace and axe units being effective against wooden siege units is a good idea actually.
Mace units maybe not, real maces are not the monstrous chunks of metal you see in fantasy, they are actually rather small. An axe yes, this I definitely agree should have bonus damage against siege and wood. The hyrecanian cavalry could greatly benefit from this. So could Kushite axemen.
Thread for posting suggestions for Alpha 27.
in General Discussion
Posted
A good idea if you intend to use experience as a resource that can be used to upgrade troops, but not for specific individuals unless you feel like doing micro on last hits, and we doing RTS not Dota last I checked