oshron

i think a specific Search and Destroy function would be unnecessary: all that really needs to be made is an Explore function (like in Empire Earth, which would command the selected units to move all over the map) and add in the capacity for units that are Exploring to break from exploration to attack if they're put in an aggressive stance

espionage units can probably be simplified alot more than alot of comments here have suggested. instead of them appearing differently, simply make them invisible to all enemy units and buildings, and they remain invisible even when they're right next to them (in contrast to, for example, sniper units in Empire Earth). the only units and buildings that can spot spies are towers (of any kind) and other spies, and perhaps heroes and a few other very specific units (like the aforementioned Celtic dogs). the primary use of spies would be to detect enemy movements, so they should probably be able to navigate forests to that end however, you can only have a specific number of spies at a time (i'd say 3-5) and, if a spy is detected, all units become hostile to it. though heroes can potentially have a special attack against spies whereby they try to convert them (because its always more useful to turn a spy to your side and make them a double-agent rather than kill them). heroes, as well-taught commanders, would probably be the only ones to have the presence of mind to do this

if a treaty system is ever employed, it could be useful to show players that you have non-aggression treaties with. allied players could have the dashed line idea, and all other agreements (or lack thereof) have regular lines while something like that would probably be good for the final game, i say a placeholder for now should just be a bar at the center of the top of the screen notifying you of which phase you are in, perhaps along with what civ you are playing as (for beginners)

aah, the Empire Earth method, then. that sounds best to me. though there should be relatively unique rubble piles for each size of building and each civilization, and a big cloud of dust should appear with each destruction to hide the instananeous appearance of the rubble also, while mining rubble isn't gonna be included, i think there should be a provision for such a function in the game designs. for instance, in Empire Earth's official campaigns, there were two seperate instances where stone mines were spawned along with rubble from four particular enemy buildings as part of the scenario's plot; and in another campaign, destroying an ancient temple (in a near-future setting) triggered the option of mining stone from them. basically, when no other stone is readily available for the purpose of a scenario, destroying a few particular buildings allowed you to collect the rubble to use in different buildings

i agree. the player could come across a destroyed village where they decide to set up their base of operations, with the ruined buildings serving as an early source of stone. though depending on the actual costs of buildings, rubble should contain about that much stone (perhaps to make them more cost-productive, the amount of stone in a pile of rubble could be equivalent to the total cost of a building, e.g. the stone and wood cost of a building combined, for example). there could probably also be generic piles of rubbles and civ-specific onesspeaking of destroyed buildings, it would probably be a good idea if functioning "ruined" buildings were included, again for scenario design. suppose the player in a given scenario comes to the site of a now-extinct civilization which has most of its buildings still mostly intact, but visibly wrecked. the player can then capture those buildings and use them for themselves.

i agree; it would add to the realism of the game, though i'd say elephants would be one of the few occasions where that happens. an idea i had was that chimpanzees or gorillas could be in the game and will normally ignore the player, but on occasion will attack unprovoked, and when they are attacked, their entire troop joins in for a miniature human vs ape battle

aah, is it more like garrisoning soldiers inside and then they can fire "arrows"?

celtic towers don't fire arrows? then what's the point of even building towers as the celts?

that's part of the reason i suggested the "musicians" as being in Part 2 the previous civs could also be amended to include them if such units were included. but i definitely agree; balancing the economic and military aspects of the game takes priority over the inclusion of more units or civilizationswhat do you think of my second idea? i'd just like to get some input on that

and iirc, it will also pertain to the Hellenization bonus and occasionally give a foreign unit to the civilization that owns it

incidentally, pertaining to this, i think that units that would use axes or maces (and other such weapons) should be the "swordsman" class. personally, thats how i always imagined axe-wielding units (like vikings) working without having to add much more to the game's functionality. though if i were to suggest any new broad unit class, they would be supportive ones: "Standard Bearers"/"Flag Carriers", which would give a morale boost to any allied units that can see it, and "Horn Blowers"/"Drummers"/"Bards", which would do the reverse: they would give a morale boost to units that they see. there are already Priests in-game, who function as healers, so later civs could either have access to a distinct unit class that could convert enemies (rare in any case) or Priests for some civs could be amended to have conversion abilities. alternatively, there could be an espionage-class of unit that not only scouts but can also bribe enemy units, which would function in the same way as conversion but at a cost of metal (simulating money)also, an idea occurred to me recently for a Part 2 civilization the other day. i was looking up the historical Kings of the Britons and noticed that the first one began around 9 AD. according to legend, King Arthur died at the Battle of Camlann around 537 or 539 AD. i'm not saying that an Arthurian civilization should necessarily be included, but maybe an Anglo-Saxon civ could be included with some editor-only units for Arthur, his court, and figures related to Arthurian myth (like the Questing Beast and the Green Knight, for instance, which are overtly fantastical as opposed to just folkloric), and the Court of Camelot could be included as an editor-only Wonder. there could even be a campaign focusing on Arthur as a historical person which pits him, leading the Brythonic Celts from Part 1, against the invading Anglo-Saxons

for the library (though i think it works best as a wonder) i would recommend saving its actual ability for one of the last things to actually be added to the game: any technologies that don't affect one specific aspect of a civilization or a civilization's specific units (eg "all infantry spearmen" rather than just "all hoplites") can be researched at the library, including Macedonian ones (though by that time the Macedonians would have probably researched those technologies already); the placement of Macedonian techs as well would be for the benefit of other civilizations that, in a given custom scenario, may capture the Library. ultimately, these techs would probably cover mostly architecture

symbolically, the Temple of Zeus would probably be better 1) becase Zeus was the king of the Greek gods, and 2) the Spartans, being all macho whatever, would probably identify more with male king Zeus rather than female virgin Artemis, who used a coward's ranged weapons in mythology no less. though i also agree that perhaps the Thebans should be included as a civ as well, or alternatively the Syracusans (pretty much just because the strongest suggestion i've seen for a learning campaign has been the foundation of Syracuse), though admittedly i see no problem in limiting the Hellenic civilizations to the Athenians, Spartans, and Macedonians, the most famous of them all. perhaps a hypothetical Part 3 could include the Thebans and Syracusans as amendments to the BC civs personally, i'm warming up more to the Spartans having the Temple of Zeus at this point, though i also think that all of the wonders we've suggested should be in the game as editor-only buildings. to reiterate what i said before, there should be two versions of all the wonders that can be built by the playable civilizations: a regular-gameplay version that has no effect other than to give a morale boost and initiate the conditions for a wonder victory (a la AOE, AOK, AOM, etc), and a second editor-only version that has an additional effect that comes into use for custom games or campaigns. here's a rough, fictional example. suppose you are playing as the Spartans against the Persians. the Persians have the ready-made wonder, the Hanging Gardens, which they have right from the beginning. a chief objective of the scenario would be to capture the Hanging Gardens because of a bonus they give towards food production and costs. for the purposes of the game, this would trigger something else that just cripples the Persian economy and makes them easier to defeat from that point, but it also lets you, the player, reap the benefits of the Gardens' food bonuses. does this make sense? well wouldn't it honestly be better if it was an obscure wonder? there's plenty of wonders in AOK, for instance, that alot of people who played the game wouldn't recognize immediately. how many people knew about the Porcelain Tower before that game, for instance? and if its an obscure building that looks pretty unique, so much the better. i again recommend the Forum as the Republican Roman wonder because it hasnt been done before and is relatively unique, even though its not a single building. we'd basically just need to figure out what the most iconic building the Forum was and build around that (it could be a big fountain, for instance, with some columns surrounding it). as for the buildings' histories, if history is included in-game (like in AOM), then that would simplify everythingyour idea with the "water-only wonders" definitely sounds cool; it would certainly open up alot of possibilities for making the civs more unique. in this situation, though i'd recommend only giving water wonders to civs that specifically have those options (like the Lighthouse and the Colossus) whereas other civs would have the same wonders as before. though, while i admit that water wonders would be cool, it may be too complicated to include something like that so, in the meantime, i think we should focus discussion for land-based wonders (like the Library and the Temple of Zeus)

while you raise a very good point, i think Stonehenge should be the default Brythonic Wonder because it's simply so iconic of Ancient Britain. though my Hanging Gardens idea has more or less already been accepted and that one has even less real justification than Stonehenge because the Persians didn't even build it. i also wouldn't recommend an oak tree 1) because that would fit better for a Germanic civilization in Part 2 (eg, as Thor's Oak) and 2) like Mythos_Ruler said, you don't build a tree don't worry, your English is quite good it's been my observation that alot of second-language English-speakers actually speak it (or rather write it) better than most people who speak it as a first language so it's looking to me like the basic accepted Wonder ideas are: Hanging Gardens (Achaemenid Persians) Parthenon (Athenians) Stonehenge (Brythonic Celts) Carthaginians -- Mausoleum of Ateban? Gauls -- no ideas Dolmen of Menga (Iberians) Library of Alexandria or Lighthouse of Alexandria (Macedonians) -- again, i personally recommend the Library because it doesn't require the existence of water on the map for it to be logically useful Mauryan Indians -- Great Stupa at Sanchi? Republican Romans -- Colosseum? Roman Senate? Roman Forum? Spartans -- Acropolis of Sparta? Colossus of "Rhodes"? Statue of Zeus?

again, Conversion or some semblance of it should be included, but to compensate it should be very difficult or otherwise costly (Bribery, for instance, could cost as much metal as it would otherwise take to just TRAIN the unit), and the priest would be very frail as a unit, and you would only be able to have a few at a time, perhaps depending on how many temples you haveand, also again, such conversion abilities should be limited to civilizations which are KNOWN to have converted foreigners on numerous occasions i think that morale boosts in the field should be given to people like standard-bearers, drummers/trumpeters, or bards of some kind (you'll notice that, in pretty much every form of fiction, bards are a more supportive class). personally, i envisioned something along these lines as a type of unit available to some civilizations as well as for a unique hero for the Greeks, Orpheus the bard

i agree, wholeheartedly. if nothing else, it would be useful to keep old versions of units, buildings, and so on in the game for scenario design. that way, for a campaign, Xenophon could appear as himself instead of being simulated with someone else, even if he's not part of regular gameplay (similar to those elven ships and modern airplanes that have been included already)

i'd say make it so that Priests can heal and convert, but can only convert within a certain distance of a temple (Church, Cathedral, w/e) and leave it at that. the inclusion of a god of some kind would work better with a selection screen like in AOM or AOE3 (which i personally envision as being part of the mythology mod i'm working on)in the context of 0AD, there could just be a civilization for Christians (or perhaps for Roman-era Israelites) as one of the AD civs in Part 2, specifically representing pre-Constantine Christians. while the Christians of the era were largely pacifists, iirc, they could probably work as a civilization. these ones would be the only civ capable of converting, unless other civilizations included are also known for proselytizing others and like i said, an alternative to conversion for other civs could still be bribery

you have to remember that its a game: when a priest converts someone in a given game type, no matter what sound effects they have, you have to imagine it as being like the priest is shouting something like: "Hold, noble savage! You do not need to fight us! Join our religion and our forces, and you will not only be rewarded with life and luxury, but with eternal salvation after you die! Your peoples' god doesn't offer you paradise in the afterlife! Join us!" personally, i think some future civs should get a priest-like unit if their civilization was historically known for proselytization (like a generic Christian civilization, for instance). but since none of the current civilizations really fit into that, there's no reason to make it so for Part 1. in current versions, there could be some special units that bribe enemies (the same thing as converting), but they DEFINITELY shouldnt be part of regular gameplayand if it ever gets to that, there should be a limit to the number of priests and so on that you can get

"tower defense" could definitely work in-game, but it would require some differences from legit tower defense games. i'm gonna use AOM as an example since i'm more familiar with that you must defend a Fortress near the center of the map (so that you automatically have a defense against encroaching soldiers) and cliffs inaccessible to the enemy that a number of your Villagers are located on where you can build towers, though your Fortress is inaccessible to your units and you can't train anything (except maybe under certain circumstances). you'd only be able to repair the Fortress by buying a means to do so (in AOM, it would be the Restoration god power). you can't gather resources, so you have to rely on getting them by killing enemy units. you could use your resources earned to build new towers, buy upgrades, or to repair damage to the towers. it would all be vulnerable melee infantrymen at first, but over time ranged infantry and eventually siege would appear as well. for simplicity, it should probably be that there is a limited number of rounds (let's say 25), over which more numerous and powerful units come at you. obviously, in AOM, this would include myth units, but for 0 AD it would be siege and other exceptionally big units, like war elephants

first and foremost, i'd like to thank you for supporting my idea second, "Part 1" means the first "final" setup, which is what everyone's focusing on right now. the focus of Part 1 is civilizations which existed between 500 and 1 BC, such as the pre-imperial Romans, Achaemenid dynasty of the Persian Empire, Alexander's Macedonian Empire, and Hannibal's Carthage; Part 2, in contrast, would focus on civilizations that existed from 1 to 500 AD, such as the entire Roman Empire (with the Western and Eastern/Byzantine empires being treated as separate civilizations) along with successors to a few of the civs from Part 1 (such as a later Persian dynasty) and barbarian tribes like the Huns

that too

personally, i think another possibility would be to try and "match" civs from Part 1 to ones in Part 2 to try and get an idea about what civs could be included; for example, the "equivalent" of the Spartans could very well be the Huns because of their (at least stereotypically) similar violent cultures. as another example, the AD equivalents of the Romans and Athenians would be the Western and Eastern Romans, respectively incidentally, i also think it would be easier for future packs to officially rename the current Romans "Republican Romans" and the Persians "Achaemenid Persians" to differentiate those two civs from their later successors (so for example there would be three "Roman" civs in all: Republican, Western, and Eastern) and its nice to see that someone as high up in the team as you, Mythos_Ruler, is also interested in the inclusion of the Mayans, as unhistorical as it would be

personally, i just hope the design team is prepared to match the number of civs being included in Part 1 for Part 2 so many different Greek civs definitely call for alot of civs in Part 2 with lots of similarities

while that would definitely work better as teh Spartan Wonder, do we actually have any idea what it looked like as an actual building? i did some quick research and didn't find anything about what its thought to have looked like (though maybe i didnt look hard enough)in any case, an ACTUAL Spartan monument would definitely be better than repurposing one an island nowhere near it (though i still think that the Colossus should be included as a Wonder available in the editor in any case, since its so iconic of the Ancient World) also, going on my earlier suggestion of there being editor-only versions of the playable civs' Wonders, what does everyone think would be some good effects for Wonders that have been decided on so far. for example, what special bonus would the editor-only version of the Hanging Gardens give? perhaps a reduction of food costs? (water in this case would be represented by food, and the Gardens were a symbol of early man's ability to make things grow even deep in the desert)

what do you all think of some of my other ones, like a repurposed Rhodes Colossus for the Spartans?