Grautvornix

Oops! But - it does indeed say "Temple of Mars" (personally I never paid so much attention to naming when playing SP)

@Emacz that's great and much appreciated, of course! My point was that if @Perzival12 has some good ideas it might be useful to test them individually in a small mod (possibly even limited to only 2 or 3 civs at the beginning) to acquire a feeling for the suggested changes. Alternatively it might be useful to join forces and work on the same mod?

You are certainly right - there could be more civ character diversity. However, balancing appears to be a MAJOR task and I remember loooong and excited discussions and changes back and forth to arrive at the current more or less stable state. Possibly, with your modding experience, do you think you could generate a few of your proposed test changes and let players look at the resulting balances?

Agree - but with the additional question (option to keep existing configs etc.) this would be just perfect.

Thanks, I knew it! And sorry for the change in topic..... There was a lot of discussion in the past if walls protect at all except against direct access, i.e. they block movement but nothing else.As a consequence, you should ideally build your walls around your buidings/troops at a distance that exceeds enemy firing range (might cost a lot of stone). Would it be possible to provide walls with an aura that reduces firing range by some margin? (from any side, except if positioned on that wall)

@OutisWalking on top of walls along their extent while being a bit protected could indeed be an interesting side-effect. Which brings me to a (most likely stupid) question: A soldier positioned on a wall has some protection against enemy fire. I the same soldier is behin that wall, does he have the same level of pretection, more protection, or less protection? From my simple mind I would guess being behind a wall shoudl provide more protection. Most likely implemented as expected. Can anyone confirm, please?

There were a nuber of discussion is the subject e.g. the one below, but it seems to be quite complex to implement. My sugestion is to create bridges as a structure like a wall (with very low height) and the properties of a field (you walk on it and can cross it). Bridges need these properties: they need to be buidable - animations will be needed (builders cannot step left and right to the bridge unlike building a wall). Question: where should we allow building bridges: on map-defined points only (as in settlers IV) or everywhere? (I'd rather opt for predefined points as a start - simply to avoid that one clutters the entire naval map with criss-cross bridges that block ships. they need to block pathfinding for ships while they exist, and not anymore if completely destroyed they need to enable pathfinding for land objects while they exist - and not anymore if they are damaged to more than a percentage to be defined (or completely destroyed?) they need to be destroyable (ships only or also land-based siege engines? If ships only, which ones?) they need to be repairable by land forces - animations will be needed I anyone could come up with a test implementation as a mod on one test map, this would be phantastic! Unfortunatly, I am more or less illiterate in programming...

I do like it, but how would the animation look like? Your ship would be placing itself alongside the enemy ship that does not / cannot flee (anymore) - why? wow? Woudl there be some time indicator, like when capturing a building? Does the ship being attacked fight back? If so how? Arrows? I am afraid we might need to make some action visible. All this would be more convincing if we had the soldiers (proportional to the actual number of pax) visible on board which is even more complex to achieve. Or should we define three boarding levels (10%, 50% 100%) and three animations with 3, 5, or 10 soldiers visibly acting? Then we could gave the a similar aniumation as when conquering a building. I am afraid there is no really simple solution. So basically we need to discuss in greater detail what it would take to implement even partially. My preferred solution would be to start with a single feature (like indicating payload level - how many soldiers are on board). This might alreadya be useful, independent of implementing more of the following. Then we would need a manoever (or player action) that immobilizes the enemy ship, and then a takeover indicator including counter attack (!) an then finally change of ownership/command or deflection of the attack. What could that be? Sinking your ship? Self-sinking the enemy ship (like the pirates in Asterix comics ), the enemy conquering your ship?

Maybe, but did the britons (or iberians?) have leopards fur? ( I adore these pictures, just could not resist splitting hairs a bit...sorry!)

I love your emblems/shields - but this one has some sort of ivy plants growing on it? Looks very nice, but there is one thing puzzling me: This is typically indicating the civ is long gone and the jungle ist starting reclaiming its grounds. At the time we are putting the game Maya were still thriving I thought?

That would indeed be a marvellous upgrade path!

For Map Filter you can also select "All Maps" in case you don't remember to which group the map you are looking for belongs (Default, Naval Maps, Demo Maps, Best for MP, Trigger Maps)

Is there really a good enough reason to enter into personal accusation of being a liar/poorly informed etc.? Can we please try and keep this discussion on a more sober basis please. Lets not overheat the discussion - there is more important things in life that deserve that level of excitement.

@wowgetoffyourcellphoneThanks so much! great game - it works nicely and is indeed another level of gameplay. (Just does not work with the SVN version yet as it seems.) Edit: and it has beautiful new maps as well!

No, I am not suggesting Asterix. (sorry could not resist)