Jump to content

MrChocolateBear

WFG Retired
  • Content Count

    173
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About MrChocolateBear

  • Rank
    Sesquiplicarius

Contact Methods

  • MSN
    Ari@AriPatrick.com
  • Website URL
    http://AriPatrick.com
  1. My concern isn't with the timeline the game encompass, it is with the amount of work required to successfully pull off your vision. As I said before, your game, in terms of number of civilizations and ages, is 5 times as large as 0 A.D.. Unless you have some way of reducing the amount of work hours required to pull this game off, your vision seems very unrealistic to me. I would be more than happy to give you ideas on how you can decrease the scope of your project, if you're interested.
  2. Thanks, berserk_cl. I'm fairly new to the team, but I think I speak on the behalf of the team when I say that it's the WFG & 0 A.D. communities that make all the work worth it. Seeing community members take their time to contribute things like game patches/improvements and localized content tells us that we're doing something right or at least not horribly wrong.
  3. oshron, I admire your ambition, but your idea seems very unrealistic, based off what you've posted so far. Creating assets for 30 factions and 15 ages is a tremendous amount of work, not to mention balancing the gameplay. What are your plans to make this project more feasible? Your project seems to be about 5 times the scale of 0 A.D., based solely on the number of factions and ages you plan on having, so I think it is really important that you consider how you can shorted the development time required to pull this project off. I'm not saying this is a bad idea, just that the scale seems treme
  4. To the best of my knowledge, converting/using enemy units is not planned though it could be added through a mod or expansion. I've never played Cossacks, so I can't be 100% sure this is the way they do it, but normally games that have thousands of units on screen at the same time don't actually treat the units as individuals, they just represent them that way. The benefit of this technique is feeling of commanding a sizable army, while the major drawback is the lack individual unit interaction. It is a matter of taste, but personally I prefer having fewer units and controlling all of them as
  5. Even though some of the things you posted aren't directly applicable to 0 A.D., they are definitely interesting and I'm sure the team historians will appreciate this information even more than I do. Because most of the people on the team don't speak french, it would be helpful if you (or someone else for that matter ) paraphrased the information most applicable to 0 A.D.. Excellent work!
  6. Personally, I don't like them. I like improving them, but I didn't like their involvement in gameplay. For me, it made the game seem more like a "who has the most/best cards" and "who can build the most settlements(?) for experience" game, rather than a traditional RTS. But that is just me...
  7. Thanks, ger_man! All these people translating the 0S page makes me wonder what language will come next! Spanish?
  8. When 0 A.D. went open-source, we released portions of the source code so community programmers could contribute to the completion of the game. If you are a programmer or want to compile an executable of the game yourself, I recommend you check out the building instructions page of the 0 A.D. Trac wiki.
  9. Apparently I was only partially enlightened.
  10. I have been enlightened since my last post. You can gather outside the gathering range, but it's not as profitable as gathering inside.
  11. They could also merge under a new title. Here are a few thoughts for the title: Legends of Honor & Glory Honor of the Old World Glory of the Old World The Honor and Glory of Legends I think merging ideas could be a good idea, as long as it is a fair merge and not an acquisition.
×
×
  • Create New...