idanwin

nice

Have you tried importing them into 0ad? I don't know how you will have to position the model before exporting so that it can be placed against mountains easily. Perfect would be that it could clip to the mountain like the docks clip to the water, but that would require coding...

I wasn't aware ... Sorry.

I like the fact that they overlap, maybe increase the footprint a little, but still let them overlap a bit ( now the footprint is really small compared to their actual size) or we could just increase the actual size ...

Maybe we shouldn't be focusing on giving penalties on building farms near civ-centers, but give bonusses to building other building close to civ-centers... e.g. a market gains value if it's build close to a civ-center, a barracks trains units with a little xp or at a faster rate (could depend on civ), houses near civ-centers could be a little higher (apartments) and have an extra +1 pop ... That is far more realistic. There are no penalties on having a farm in the city (once you own the land), but as a center it is beneficial for trade, recruitment and there is a big demand for housing. So my bonus-instead-of-penalty proposition: Barracks: -Increased training rate (easier to find new recruits in a city) Blacksmith: -Decreased cost for tech (cities attract merchants) Dock: -Trade value bonus (cities attract merchants) House: -A +x pop (apartments) Market: -Trade value bonus (cities attract merchants) Temple: -no bonus? Corral, Farmstead, Field, Fortress, Wonder, Defense buildings & Special buildings: -no bonus This would be much more realistic and have the same effect. If you want to have protected fields, that's fine, but you could've used that space for better things. The bonus could be shown when placing a building. When very close it would show (+10% value) a bit further it might say (+5% value). Maybe the building could color green if it would get a bonus.

nice job, the door looks a bit too wide to me though

Farming doesn't require wood... How do I know? I live on a farm. Building the farmhouse, making tools, etc. necessitates resource, but sustaining a farm once it has those doesn't cost. (not true anymore, dependency upon seed manufacturers) The main problem is space, farms require lots and lots of space. That's why you didn't have (a lot of) them within the city/castle walls. That's how you could starve the enemy.

Would be amazing for scenarios, would they give the owner a trickle of metal?

That's fine :-) The way I see it I - as player - am a commander. Or possibly a tyrant. Anyway: I do all of the tactics, and bossing people around in general ("stop idling, idlers! hunt! mine! chop wood! and don't stop unless I don't forget to sound the alarm when the enemy is coming!") but I trust my spies to be good at their job. I don't want to have to figure out how the spy has to get behind the enemy lines. Of course in a mod spies are fine :-) And lets get back on topic now ;-)

I like those trees, they're so ... mediterranean. Sure, they could use an update.

And I would love a better pathfinder :-p

I would love Pythagoras. 0 A.D. Alpha XVI : Pythagoras Love it!

Romulous, I'm afraid I'm not following your criticism. I know how to read and I know what a spy is. Where would you get the idea that I don't?! My argument is that having these special spy units would increase micromanagement without adding anything positive to the gaming experience IMO. So I'm against spy units. However I would like to add something that reveals where the enemy king/emperor/etc. is. A bit like in the (board) game 'Scotland Yard', where the position of Mr. X is revealed periodically. This would allow you to focus your attack force on certain areas of the enemy territory. Sending spies on a mission to discover the location of the leader sounds very reasonable to me. However I don't want to have to move this spy all around the map, diverting my attention from resource management and troop recruitment. Making spies a hidden feature to the game (a bit like Europa Universalis and Crusader Kings, two games I love) would add the novelty of spies adding barely any micromanagement (i.e. you send spies on a mission to discover the location of the enemy king/emperor/etc. and after a while this location will be highlighted so that you know where to send your army. After this mission is complete you can send your spies on a new mission) There would be no spy units that you have to train, move, etc.

Great!

Would that be allowed? If it is, that would be awesome!

The right side of her face (from her POV) looks a bit too thin, maybe move the nose a bit?

Ok, I would try to get rid of the flat roof, but I don't really know how either ... Maybe make it start a bit higher than the other roof, and depending on how the gap feels either leave it open (make the roof go a bit over the other roof in that case) or fill it up with vertical planks. P.S. I just read through the thread again and you already told us that you didn't know what to do with that part, sorry, I'd totally missed that.

There is still one flat roof, is this intentional?

Kings/rulers could fight, but didn't. They wouldn't risk their lives in battle (except in movies). What's the point of spy units that you move around? That's so much micromanagement!

I think regicide should be with kings/emperors that can't fight (or at least are barely useful). The regicide mode could also have 'spies' so that you can easily find out where enemy rulers are hiding. This could be a temporary technology (you hire spies to find out where the ruler(s) are hiding, but you only see them for a short period of time and if you want to reveal them again you have to hire spies again).

Much better! (but there is still a flat part) I really like the design. Maybe you should lower the planks a bit entirely, now they seem to be above the main roof they should start under it (so that the water does not get blocked between the two).

I like the tower + wood side thing a lot!

I'm definitely for giving each ruler a different playing style. And I think it's a very good idea to think about (and collect) taunts, traits and tactics that fit these personalities. Please don't get me wrong on that. It's just that I think that actually implementing all these (slightly) different AI's might be something that could wait. But that shouldn't stop people from making some 'sketches'. Every faction would need some rulers with particular styles (like expansionist, raider, turtler and balanced) and the others could be slight variations on these with preferences for certain unit types/technologies.

Wouldn't 8 personalities per faction be a lot? I think we have 12 factions (including Seleucides) that would mean 96 personalities in total! I wouldn't complain if people are willing to do that, but it does sound like a lot of work. Would the benefits of having so many AI personalities weigh up to the confusion it would give new players? I personally think it is more reasonable to start less ambitious (4 per faction say - I never played a game with more than 4 same civs) and (since this is open source) we can always add more when we feel like it.