Grautvornix
-
Posts
112 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Grautvornix
-
-
Interesting bug - does it only work for women in houses? It doesn't seem to work for soldiers garrisoned in a tower (or waiting in front). Background is that I tend to surround towers by houses for protection and sometimes I accidentally leave too many soldiers from building activity inside. While 5 can be garrisoned in the tower, the remaining ones have to stay deadlocked where they are. A teleport option would be nice in this case. Was never able to get that working.
Thanks for your advice!
-
Taking the water-as-a-resource-idea a bit further , Romans as an example could have aquaeducts as a special building, guiding water from a well to a CC. Aquaeducts could be implemented as a kind of wall structure that provide a water supply aura for CC, fields, stables etc.
Possibly a "water aura" could give a very small population bonus to houses (e.g. +1) within the aura.
I do apologize for putting such crazy ideas out for discussion as they may impact development and gameplay alike...something to consider for version A39 possibly
.
-
1
-
-
Thanks for the thumbs up! @phosit I particularly noticed that fields can be built anywhere, even in the desert, on snowy land, or on paved areas. I believe the game does not distinguish different undergrounds or soils and their respective fertility and may only have occasionally preferred/preset locations for fields (shown as "raw farmland") that (I believe) give a slight bonus to farming. Similar argumentation would possibly go for livestock stables.
Building a well next to it could be used to create a similar or even higher bonus on farming yield, similar to the treatmill that was existing for gauls and/or britons in earlier versions of the game.
With respect to the CC, the point I was coming from was that:
- in many oasis scenarios the oasis itself has no real impact on gameplay except it represents an obstacle, and provides predefined trees and wildlife.
- in nomad mode you can select any point for CC that is strategically suitable,e.g. next to valuable resources, or a place that can be better defended. These considerations in the game do not look into supplying population with water.
So, if I select a nice location with easy access to metal or stone, but do not have water, I should build one or two wells to mimic water supply in game - or I place my CC next to a water body (river, lake or the like).
Discovering and capturing pre-installed "forgotten" wells or having to stay next to an oasis in a desert scenario could possibly influence game strategy.
I do acknowledge that adding water as an additional resource in game could entail a significant redesign (which I'd like to avoid). Hence the proposal adding bonusses for wells as a minimum.
-
Dwellings typically depend on the availability of water. A good location is one that has good and sufficient water supplies.
Should we therefore possibly add a kind of water supply concept ?
How would that work:
- CC could get a population bonus of a few percent if
- there is a river/lake next to them. For this we would need adding a "water source" tag in the code to designate a lake as supply source, and add an associated aura (this may however turn out to be complex as these are new objects and they are irregularly shaped).
- build a wells (that has a water supply aura next to the CC.
- production system for crops now including water as a new aura or resource? How could that work?
- again, either build your fields next to a river or lake,
- or build a well next to your fiield. Cannot build more than, say, 4 fields per well. Rice would need more water, of course.
Just an idea.
-
3
-
I do like the idea of adding another dimension to the game - potentially as a mod if this is felt adding too much complexity in the vanilla game.
If I remember correctly there is already a kind of static ammunition supply system in Delenda Est where an additional supply cart has to be built and put next to the catapult otherwise catapults won't fire anymore (or less frequently?). @wowgetoffyourcellphone
-
Well, if I may, I believe that, classically, a wall protected people on the other side from attacks,
- except from high flying arrows (but probably with much less range)
- and except from catapult projectiles.
Not sure if we have in 0aD a reduced range aura for arrows and a block against javelins. This appears to be preferable for for all walls and to some extend also to palisades.
A wall in enemy territory thus would make sense in order to build one's own protected "invader's base"- if you can defend the building works long enough (which might be challenging already). Using the builders crew to man the wall thus preventing it from decaying and defending it at the same time might then be indeed a good idea. Possibly this would apply mostly to really large maps where you are able to establish a base in an unsurveyed corner of the enemy territory.
Just my twocents.
-
13 hours ago, Sun Wukong said:
And quick buttons to turn off music and sounds, and not a rolling ball that needs to be turned with a wheel.
Not sure I understand why the solution to turn the overall volume to zero with a slider is not ok. It works after all...
If we provide separate toggle buttons for each property (there may be many other things that appear desirable for single button control) we would create another large menu.
-
Can't this wall/outpots just remain with the original owner who built it (unless conquered by an adversary)?
Or ist that by principle only possible if manned permanently? (missing terrain aura or the like)
-
24 minutes ago, causative said:
Capturing and enslaving civilians is also a war crime.
That's why I suggest "conversion" instead of capturing, i.e. they become your own citizens.
But never mind, I belive this is anyhow a more academic discussion. Not sure I want to live in a OAD world myself.
-
In the end, the game is about warfare; and this involves many activities that are not accepted by today's standards anymore. As an example, chasing and killing fleeing women and traders to satisfy victory conditions (until no one survives) might be changed like implemented in DE (capturing instead of killing). Converted women/traders would not be slaves but become standard citizens.
On the other hand, destroying your own units, e.g. because they are not needed anymore is - bluntly - also murder. I guess we are entering a slippery slope in this discussion.
My proposal would be to introduce capturing/converting of civilians instead of killing them (also creating interesting complications of over population, as well as the option for the adversary to re-capture them). Would that be a way to balance our approach a bit?
-
Here are a few noob micro tactics for more casual players like myself. Might still be useful at least against AI, although possibly quite obvious.
(Certainly this is not a full strategy that wins the game on its own. You need to build up strong economy, significant population and develop technology.)-
use fast cavalry to
- chase and eliminate adversary traders. You reduce economic power of your enemy and win resources. Hit and run towards your nearest tower or fortress or group of ranged units
- kill/capture (in DE) enemy women (not nice but impairs resource gathering).
- attract single warriors and welcome them with a number of ranged units and/or towers.
- conquer and destroy enemy markets.
- in naval maps conquer and destroy enemy harbours to remove their ship building capability and let you "rule the waves"
- when you have sufficient forces try conquering and manning one or two enemy towers. Note that a damaged tower is more easy to capture. Captured towers in enemy territory automatically reduces adversary population. If the tower is heavily attacked, destroy it before it falls back into enemy hands.
- conquer and garrison enemy stables (cavalry only) and barracks (infantry only). This automatically increases experience of the garrisonned and allows "local production" of more forces. Initially stay away from fortresses and Civil Centres as they are well defended and harder to capture.
- conquer and populate temples (heals your forces) and keeps them fresh and available in country.
-
use fast cavalry to
-
Neither it does for me ("wake the urge in me to transfer that into real life" that is) but we could certainly think about capturing civilians instead of killing them (in game you certainly need to also reduce economic power of your adversary - markets, traders, buildings - and gatherers).
I believe I've seen that capturing instead of killing implemented in Delenda Est. Not so sure about historical reality though.
Best regards,
Grautvornix -
6 hours ago, Vantha said:
It would also help to have heroes be set to passive by default to avoid them attacking alone.
That is a great idea! Often have to call back my hero attacking on his own "spontaneously"-
-
Well, personally I think if allied view was enabled from the beginning by default the game would loose one element of discovery where everyone is. If I may, I'd prefer this not to be available, or, at least configurable (yet another parameter, I know). Apologies for the negative tone!
-
My personal preference would indeed be to let only infantry man towers and fortresses. Ranged infantry could possibly provide an additional arrow bonus if that is not too complicated too implement.
I would also tend to basically garrison infantery in barracks and cavalry in stables - nothing wrong with that I believe.
However - I like your idea to separate rider from horses! This could also be an interesting complication to the game :
- corrals (!) could train horses
- barracks train infanterymen
--> garrisoning horses and infanterymen in stables could train cavalry of the respective type (range, spear, sword etc.)I am aware this would be a major change to game mechanics, add more micro management, and will most likely turn out to be quite complex to implement. It could however add another dimension in game economy (like in the early settlers games, sorry my background). Just dreaming a bit...
Best regards,
Grautvornix -
Sorry, and maybe I am wrong, but, as a consequence, wouldn't this apply to many, if not all, tech developments in all buildings? If enabled one could select and queue all techs and just wait until the respective resources were available. Unfortunately, I don't think this is very attractive from the gameplay perspective.
So far new techs were only available for selection once their necessary preconditions are met (researched basics + sufficient resources available). Now if we limit that only to available resources I am afraid the user mightbe tempted to select entire techtree at once and start collecting resources. Please advise!
Thank you very much!
Best regards,
Grautvornix-
1
-
-
Kleiner Nachtrag: Fischerbote können alternativ zu einem Intefanteristen auch mit einem Bürger/einer Arbeiterin besetzt sein um einen Wal zu jagen. Das Fischerbot ist übrigens sogar ein bisschen schneller als der Wal
-
1
-
-
@Gurken Khan Das glaube ich eigentlich auch, aber nachdem offenbar auch das besetzte Fischerboot Wale jagen kann,was mir vorher so nicht klar war, war ich da unsicher. Hab's gleich ausprobiert - es geht nicht mit besetzten Fischerbooten und auch nicht mit Kriegsschiffen. Fazit: Schwimmende Schätze, die nicht vom Ufer erreichbar sind, können nur von Handelsschiffen gesammelt werden.
-
1
-
-
Schätze im Wasser kann man mit dem Handelsschiff erbeuten (ich glaube, das ist die einzige Möglichkeit - ausser das weiter oben erwähntte mit einer Person besetzte Fischerboot kann das auch, muss ich aber erst mal ausprobieren).
-
1
-
-
Great idea! I am curious: Would you have a ideas how these should look like and which characteristics they should feature?
Could be useful to draft something before deciding
Best regards,
Grautvornix
-
Just stumbled across the modiomod that does resolve my original request (being able to see from within the mod.io download windowwhich of my installed mods have updates).
Great solution ! Thanks a lot!
-
@Ceres: Playing devil's advocate here: Could the game detect which OS it is running on and then automatically present the correct paths ?
Answer: could be risky if OS is incorrectly detected. Also if one actually intends examining the paths of another OS it might be better suited to select this from the buttons you presented.
So, trying to counter adverse interventions - I do like your approach!
Best regards,
Grautvornix-
1
-
-
Fully agree to putting this information (mod/map installation) into the FAQ - dupllication of information is dangerous as it could lead to inconsistencies. Just wanted to point out what new users are fighting with (looking through the forum with so many different maps and mods and not knowing how to install).
Best regards,
Grautvornix-
1
-
-
Well, frankly, when starting a game I believe it can be part of the fun to not exactly know where the others are (in most cases you can guess). This is also the reason for the "fog of war" and the need for scouting.
Even more, if you are playing nomads, you may even not be able to determine beforehand where the CCs are but only where the starting position is.
As you can dynamically select for some maps how many players participate, it will be challenging to show the positions on the static preview.
Providing a map preview serves, as @hyperion pointed out, to recognise a map and to get an overview of what this is about topographically (desert, jungle, mountains, sea scape...). Sorry for being so negative, but I personally would probably not overload the preview.
Best regards,
Grautvornix-
2
-
Is 0ad going to die?
in Introductions & Off-Topic Discussion
Posted
Maybe I am a bit too relaxed, having never played a mulitplayer game, but looking at some of the discussions in this forum, I am really surprised that people take 0AD that serious - like a real war thing, like a matter of life and death. It is definitely not, I hope. This is not even an official contest and you can win only friends and a bit of experience.
So come on folks, this is a game we all want to enjoy.
And, no, I don't think it is is going to die so soon.