Grautvornix

Indeed I also favor beige and white as the white background looks well balanced and also increases readability of the text.

As also suggested in this threat, the wall could very well be owned by one of the factions provided we find a balancing mechanism that provides disadvantages for the faction owning the wall. This would be more historical than a neutral wall separating two (or several) factions. As an example, such balancing disadvantage could be fewer resources for the wall-owning civ. In fact, I could even magine a scenario where one faction is placed in the centerpiece of the map surrounded by walls and several other factions surrounding this area can be available for attack or support. Alternatively, a scenario like the siege of Alesia by the Romans would be interesting. Here, the centerpice would be a fortified Gallic city with Romans surrounding it between own double walls (having however not many resources) and support troops arrive from outside. Just phantasizing...

Would not mind having the wall belong to one of the factions (like in the limes case or for Hadrian's wall - or the great chinese wall). In return to this "unfair" advantage we might want to deplete resources a bit on their side, e.g. less stone or metal. Alternatively, a more complex scenario could be envisaged where the faction owning the wall would be threatended by Gaia on their own side, e.g. a village that was originally a peaceful ally would turn into hostilities after a certain time. This would try mimicking treason as happened in many cases in history (must be scripted - trigger could be an attack by the adversary or whenever anyone crosses the wall).

Looks beautiful!

I have to admitt I do like this a lot! Reminds me of my past playing settlers IV (and before) where resources must be available nearby where they are needed. Will download the mod and try it.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone Awesome! This implements a good deal of what we discussed in Looking forward to testing it!

@alreThese non-naval civs could possibly have specific coastal defense options offering a different counter strategy. It might not be very historical nor interesting in the sense of gameplay to just equip them with the same capability as naval civs. If I may, here are some rough ideas for coastal defense options: a finite max population of fire ships that can be built (something like the Iberians), say, 12 max at any time, after the technology was researched (BTW, I'd love to see fire ships generally having an "ignition" or "attack" command starting to countdown , instead of just starting it when cosntruction is finished, so one could build a few in reserve preparing a defense and place them strategically like a kind of sea mines - that could add interesting strategic options. I believe however these should not have a "proximity fuse" but need to be manually activated (good timing would then be crucial). military harbours ("sea forts") that fire back on ships (like the Britons have?). These could either be more resistant to ship artillery fire (most likely difficult to distinguish from land artillery fire), or create a higher damage to ships when firing back, or have a longer attack range, or provide an enforcement/protection aura for own (smaller melee ships) Also attack range and damage of artillery ships might need to be carefully balanced so that they can only attack buildings at the immediate coastline. For further damage at land one would need to disembark the troops. A typical defense scenario for such non-naval civs could then look like a wall and towers placed a bit off the coast..

That's correct. Most probably this has been designed because you always get better quality troops (motivation) from your home country than from an occupied country. Just speculating.

Beautiful! I already love the old version - will try the new on tonight! Thanks for your effort, well done!

DIdn't check in detail for all civs, but I believe once an enemy's CC (or barracks) has been captured you can train your own units (not the enemy type of units though).

Right - unless you manage your water resources properly (i.e. build more wells, settle close to an oasis etc.)

Awesome! Looking forward to it!

Sorry - stupid me - should have read more carefully - you were actually after screenshots of units. These can be found possibly within the various civilization discussions like https://wildfiregames.com/forum/forum/409-art-development/ https://wildfiregames.com/forum/forum/432-official-tasks/ etc. Many can be found in civilzation descriptions that @wowgetoffyourcellphone beautifully created (search for "Civ:") or as a design task (search for "===[TASK]==="). Here are some examples.

@tantanmen Hello and welcome to the forum! There is indeed a thread in this forum that attempts collecting screenshots: You can find it here: Best regards and have fun with OaD! Grautvornix

@man_s_ourLooking forward to your mod! Will that involve wells that are actually built (possibly a small building like a pump room or well house) or is that more like a new technology? Wouldn't this also work in the same way for ground water, e.g. if we can have ground water available depending on the map texture and/or plants? (maybe too complicated) My thought was originally to allow drilling for water near fresh water bodies (lakes, ponds, rivers, streams) as well as near oasis kind of places that obviously have ground water underneath. This is specifically important for the arid maps in game. Anyway just a few thoughts. Eager to see your mod in action!

Adding water to create better crops results is one of the central ideas dicussed also in the thread below. Here we would introduce wells as additional buildings to support watering your crops thus getting a yield even in the desert. Would be interested to get your opinion on the discussions there!

We do have such an accelerator object already in the vanilla game - it is part of the Maurian trade accelerator (Ashoka columns) that can be place to speed up traders along their routes by 20%. Possibly we can use that as a template for roman roads, e.g. as a milestone/kilometer stone (possibly complemented with some artwork indicating the road between stones?) Issue would be potentially required terrain flattening and it will not be possible to introduce bridges so easily.

Sometimes I'd liket hat, too. .. But only if everyone else agrees with my vote to expatriate a particluar politician. Otherwise I'd consider it unfair

Yes, but in this case the road is not just a "painted" terrain feature but an object on the map - which might require also some changes to the game engine. I am afraid this might remain a dream for some time.

Interesting idea! Would roads then be built by romans (only) or would that be a map feature? Could anyone use them? (and move faster) They would then not be destroyed...

@Gurken Khan Moin! Hillarious!

Hello everyone from southern Germany! (originally form the northern part ). BTW, is there a region statistics somewhere on this forum? (for the German beancounters among us )

I do understand the point that, implementing walls reducing damage onto troops on the respective other side, is difficult to achieve. (Only wall/tower-garrisoned troops should have a range and protection bonus,; most likely they already do) When looking at the ballistics this should be the same issue if firing across a hill or ridge or another obstacle (building). Not sure the current engine takes this fully into account. I believe there is already a height bonus/malus for shooting from above/from below, but firing across an elevated obstacle could indeed generally reduce damage, possibly depending on the height of that obstruction. Hmm, I smell added complexity here... I'd be interested in getting your opinions here. Thanks!

And vice versa! This should be independent who actually owns that wall. Player A' ranged units behind the wall should also be dampened against player B on the other side (shorter damage range) - except for those ranged troops of player A that are placed on the wall/the towers. They could possibly have increased damage range.

Oops, maybe I have chosen the wrong words - I tried to say that walls are meant to protect those hiding inside from attacking units, including ranged units to some extent. Walls might thus have an effect to the damage range that a ranged unit can achieve from either side (and protect from sword or spear units).