Jump to content

Outis

Community Members
  • Posts

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Outis

  1. I understand about historical battles but even for non-historical scenarios like Caribbean Island and Northern Islands? It would be good to have the freedom to chose by default rather than modifying the maps in Atlas.
  2. Yes, it is possible to copy objects. There is no way to copy terrain though.
  3. Hello @trompetin17, Is it possible to implement a feature to copy selected section of one map onto another map? It may even have an option to copy terrain, objects, or both.
  4. Hello @andy5995, Some skirmish maps have preselected factions. Is this by design? Can you allow faction selection for skirmish maps?
  5. Hey @vladislavbelov, I just updated my NVIDIA drivers and now it works! Thank you very very much
  6. Hey @vladislavbelov, i added the lines to the user.cfg, but I see the same behavior. Can you check my user.cfg file attached? Does it look correct? user.cfg
  7. Hello @vladislavbelov thank you very much for the quick response . The OS is Windows 7. I am attaching the hwdetect and the systeminfo. system_info.txt userreport_hwdetect.txt
  8. Hello friends, I receive an error screen when I try to launch Alpha 26 after successful installation, and the game does not start. When I install Alpha 25 again, it works normally as before. Reinstalling Alpha 26, I get the same behavior of the game not starting. I am attaching the logs. Can you help me? crashlog.dmp mainlog.html crashlog.txt
  9. Not exactly, please consider it with: - siege units function only with units garrisoned, - when you damage an enemy siege unit below a certain level, garrisoned operator are kicked out, and you have the capability to capture it. This accomplishes 2 things: - reintroduce the capture mechanic, but hopefully with enough micro to make it worth it (note you still have the no-painful-micro option to destroy it completely like the current game) - introduce the mechanic to make siege units move and attack faster in a micro-intensive way, all the while avoiding loss of function without painful micro In other words, no forced frustrating micro like suggested by @chrstgtror @real_tabasco_sauce, but hopefully implement some ideas from @Darkcity in a fun way.and give more options.
  10. Fair enough, what about training siege units with a couple citizen soldiers already garrisoned inside, that way the micro of garrisoning extra units for extra speed and attack speed is optional and not forced.
  11. This is an RTS so i expect some micro is in order to win. Besides, siege units are generally not plentiful, so i expect it will be manageable.
  12. Maybe the garrisoned units are kicked out after the siege unit is damaged below a level, and it is captureable when not garrisoned. So, to capture, we damage the siege unit first, get rid of the garrison, then capture. This way, it is not a disaster when your siege is captured because it is time-consuming to capture and the siege unit is vulnerable when captured.
  13. @BreakfastBurrito_007 & @real_tabasco_sauce fair enough about complicating without any added benefit. What do you (and everyone else) think about this: - Sparta has Spartiatai in P2 in limited numbers (historically, they could create a champion army due to their social structure without creating a large state, or P3 in our case) - Spartiatai become much stronger than champions of other factions in P3 through technology pairs suggested by @wowgetoffyourcellphone, still in limited numbers but more than in P2 (historically, they suffered from low population, due to being a small state and population decline a.k.a. Oliganthropia) - As a further strategic choice, include Cleomenes III as a hero, instead of Agis III, who brings a technology, call it Land Reform (help me with a name please), which removes or relaxes the limit to Spartiatai in exchange for a slight decrease in stats or nullify the above techs (historically, Cleomenes III made a land reform to increase the number of Spartiatai, slight decrease in stats is my interpretation for a break in tradition. He also reformed Spartiatai to use sarissa rather than dory, we may include it as well)
  14. They did not have anything special, but since they achieve free status after serving in the military, they must be good enough soldiers to survive at least one campaign. I think such a mechanic existed in DE @wowgetoffyourcellphone
  15. This historically accurate and truly represents the strength of the faction. Great idea .
  16. This would work like taking the ship to drydock for repairs. Sounds cool .
  17. I agree unique is better. One can argue starting completely defenseless, but garrisonable, and gaining experience over time, is also a derivation of a very long creation time. Ultimately, all units are similar in the way they are created. Nuances are subtle, but they make the difference. If we can find a completely unique idea, I'm all for it . In the meantime, i will try to make my idea more interesting with the hope of winning you . The spartiatai can "train" by using the attack animation on some wooden dummies around the syssitia, so no need for a new wrestling animation. The number of wooden dummies available may be a limiting factor for the number of spartiatai which can train simultaneously. An interesting mechanic could be: if spartiatai do not train or engage in combat for x seconds, they start to lose rank. Spartiatai were better because they trained whenever they were outside combat. We can make them lose their status if they are idle.
  18. What didn't resonate with me about defenseless was: 1) even measly helots can fight immediately after they are trained, why are spartiatai completely defenseless? 2) training is a gradual process, from complete defenseless to champions doesn't feel organic. I agree it shouldn't be identical to garrisoning a barracks. Increase in experience can be faster, and rather than garrisoning, they can train within an aura, so they are still vulnerable.
  19. This sounds like an interesting mechanic. I propose that they are not completely defenseless, but start like citizen hoplites. The differences to perioikoi will be: 1) the ability to gain experience from syssitia (training) 2) the ability to reach champion status 3) no gathering or building
  20. Why don't we call them hippeis? It fits their royal guard status perfectly: https://books.google.com/books/about/Sparta_and_War.html?id=QF9PDgAAQBAJ#v=onepage&q=spartan hippeis&f=false
  21. Putting some measure to limit the number of Spartans is a great idea because the main problem of Sparta was that the number of the Spartiates declined over time due to losses and debt. Their numbers could not be restored due to the rigid social structure.
  22. Background: Krypteia was a practice (details not certain) to instill fear in the helots to discourage rebellion and maintain their social status as slaves. Neodamodes (pl. Neodamodeis) is the name given to the class of former helots who are given certain freedoms in exchange for military service. This was necessary due to the declining manpower.
  23. Another proposal: Helots lose the ability to advance rank with experience, and Introduce a technology pair: 1) Krypteia: Helots have (slightly) increased gather rates Or 2) Neodamodeis: Helots gain the ability to advance rank with experience The idea is to give the choice of either having better economy to support the production of the best infantry in the game or to have more variety in the military
  24. Is the presence of the co-king necessary on the map? I was imagining him to sit in the Gerousia. Hence the proposal to include it as a tech rather than a unit. Speaking of Gerousia, I think it would be great to include the building in the game. The model is already there...
×
×
  • Create New...