Jump to content

Grautvornix

Community Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    117

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Grautvornix

  2. New Scenario Map: The Limes

    in Scenario Design/Map making

    Posted

    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...

     

    • Like 1

  3. Roman Castrum

    in Eyecandy, custom projects and misc.

    Posted

    21 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    I honestly think "Limes" could be a cool either map type or random map. The map would be divided by Roman walls into sections by number of players. The walls would be Gaia and have to be broken through in order to get into the enemy's side of the map. So, two players would have one long wall down the middle of the map cutting it in half, etc.

    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).

    • Like 1

  5. Realism mod (early beta)

    in Game Modification

    Posted

    6 hours ago, man_s_our said:

    the resources mechanism now changed. instead of being able to put the resources in a very far storehouse and immediately use them to build some building, the builders will need to carry the needed resources to build (which requires the resources or storehouse be closer for faster building). todo: adding workshops for delayed converting of a resource to another (like using forgery to convert metal to swords).

     

    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.

    • Thanks 1

  7. Naval Overhaul (Alpha 27)

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    @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..

     

  13. (1) How are units assembled? (2) Are there body meshes for the units? (3) ... ?

    in Art Development

    Posted

    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.

     

     

     

     

    • Thanks 1

  15. Proposal to add water as a resource

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by 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! :victory:

  16. Suggestions for 0 A.D.

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    2 hours ago, man_s_our said:

    what I did is simply making the fields have finite amount of supplies and need water + grain to plant new ones.

    I have future plan to make it more water dependent. like if there is water under it it will have positive change. otherwise it will die.

    fertility is similar to my idea of global and local auras related to climate. but I intended it to be about making units that are good in desert have penalties when being in frozen maps and so on.

    I think @wowgetoffyourcellphone would do great in handling this part.

    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!

     

  17. Ideas for unique technologies

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Grautvornix

    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. 

    • Like 2

  19. Ideas for unique technologies

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    Just now, LienRag said:

    Romans building capabilities would be nice to have, but that's a huge change to the game (and probably to the game engine).

    Having roads as a map feature is easier to do.

    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.:eek:

  23. Simple improvement for walls

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    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!

    • Like 2

  24. Simple improvement for walls

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    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.

  25. Simple improvement for walls

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted

    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).

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...