MrBlack103

If you're looking for ideas, the Age of Chivalry mod for AoK is full of some great stuff

I was reading up on the Spartans a bit and encountered a strange statement - The Spartans thought that the highest form of love was between two men. The explanation for this is that they believed that if two gay men were in the same division of the army, they would fight harder to impress each other. It must have worked, I reckon, because as many of us know, the Spartans had a fearsome reputation on the field of battle. Just thought that this little discovery might generate a bit of discussion.

Well, what stops cheat units like LDV (Lord Darth Vader for all you non-star-wars-freaks out there ) from being "officially a mod"?

Most people here would probably be willing to pay for such a good-looking game, I reckon.

What about TLA, then? That's based comletely on Tolkien stuff, so shouldn't it be illegal?

I like it how the non-playable factions are being organised in TLA. Perhaps you could make 0 A.D. similar in this aspect.

I don't like it how in many RTS games the stone and gold are rocks with sparkly bit just sitting about in the open. If it were like that, there wouldn't even be any left before the game started, lol. Could you make it so that the stone comes from cliffs or something? A good example of this is in "Theocracy" if you know of it. And could the "metal" resource be found like in The Settlers III, having to go prospecting and build mine shafts?

Extra morale bonus to nearby troops with every kill they make would be pretty cool as well

Finally! Some replies!

especially considering their units are already completely unique.

Yeah, but it's a bit hard to find someone who still speaks Ancient Greek

Well, standard units gain experience, so I don't see why heroes can't do similar stuff.

No, it's probably the real one just with the "Trojan horse" added in. Oops, I meant to say Trojan virus

If the sun is shining in the eyes of some units, it could give them an acccuracy disadvantage or something.

A buldable "port surface" wouldn't be a bad idea - building your own jettys and wharfs

Agreed

Alternatively, if adding towers to walls is too complicated, you could have it like in AoM how there are towers at regular intervals and you can just click a button when the wall is selected to turn it into a gate.

More importantly, will the AI use walls effectively? ie finding choke points, stationing archers on them etc.

Okay, I've been thinking out a system I would like to see in an RTS game that I don't think should cause too much lag, while still being unique and boring. On a basic level, any human unit has only one (yes, one!) hitpoint. However, there are multiple modifiers that affect whether the unit dies or not. Let's use an archer trying to shoot a swordsman as an example. There are several stages in this sequence: accuracy: Obviously, the archer would have to actually hit its target. Accuracy is a factor in most RTS games, so this would be quite easy to implement. This would probably signified as x% and would increase or decrease with the implemented "skill" of the archer. shielding: If the arrow manages to hit, the shield of its target comes into play. Depending on what type of shield, the chances of it blocking the damage (and I mean completely blocking!) would again be defined as x%. This is also where formations come into play. For example, if the swordsman was part of a turtle-like formation, the chances of the arrow penetrating would be significantly lowered due to the neighboring shields. damage: Okay, so the arrow has hit its target and buries itself into the flesh. Now you should be thinking "the soldier dies now, right?". That depends - there are two types of damage - a) fatal/critical: this completely kills the soldier, obviously. minor: this is simply an injury that has not completely incapacitated a soldier. Instead of dying, the soldier's fighting capabilities are lowered, simulating blood loss and struggling to stay upright. This is also where a soldier's "damage graphics", which have been discussed elsewhere, come in handy. Additionally, if the soldier has already taken a "minor" injury, he dies anyway. On top of all this, the soldier's armour, depending on how good it is, reduces the chances of the injury being "fatal". Also, the chances of it being fatal depend on what type of damage the soldier is recieving. The same sort of process goes for hand-to-hand combat. Just visualize swords as arrows. I know that this would involve totally changing the game engine, but changes such as this would make this an entirely unique game.

I reckon there should be an "enslave" option for some units, so they can capture enemies and turn them into slaves. I too don't like the "rebelling option, though.

Yeah, and make sure the birds don't just fly around like in AoK - make them land in trees, on buildings etc. occasionally.

How about there is a "custom hero maker" and some cheat would enable you to get the current custom hero? This would keep everyone happy, I think, because people could keep this cheat as whacky or as sensible as they like.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but since this is a non-profit game, using some famous characters from other people's stuff (like Tolkien) wouldn't infringe copyright? It'd almost be like advertising someone else's stuff.

Don't cheat, then. Perhaps if people lack self-discipline there can be an option at the start of a game that allows you to cheat or not. Yes. Well, when it is guaranteed that you're going to lose, class yourself as a loser mentally, then have some fun with the opposition. I do agree that cheating cannot bring satisfaction with a win, but it is fun.

perhaps a unit has an option of whether to attempt to capture a building or try to damage it.