MrChocolateBear

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.

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.

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 tremendous. I think that with a few scope adjustments, you could have a much more feasible game. At any rate, I'm looking forward to reading more about your game idea.

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 I please.

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!

I like the way you think, buggy123!

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...

Interesting! I didn't know that. Learned something new!

Thanks, ger_man! All these people translating the 0S page makes me wonder what language will come next! Spanish?

Fantastic! Great to see the website in so many different languages!

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.

It's great to see people making contributions like this. Thanks lmg!

Apparently I was only partially enlightened.

I have been enlightened since my last post. You can gather outside the gathering range, but it's not as profitable as gathering inside.

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.

It seems a number of us prefer "brains" over "brawn!"

I don't feel confident enough to give any estimates on how increasing the population cap will effect the minimum requirements. Adjusting the population cap is probably something we will play with when the game is closer to completion, so we will have a better idea of how expensive it is on the hardware, as well as how it affects gameplay overall.

Shield Bearer, did you mean 150? I think buggy123 is right. We should start with a lower percentage once the game is in a more finished state, then playtest to balance it out.

Megacles, sorry it has taken me so long to reply to your posting. Excellent topic by the way! Since I joined the development team, I have been monitoring the way things are done to have a better understanding of how WFG works. Much like you, I've noticed a few areas of improvement, and am currently taking steps to resolve those issues. A few of the things I am discussing with the team and will most likely be working on: Creating a comprehensive list of tasks related to 0 A.D.'s development. Reorganizing the Track Roadmap & ticket listings. Creating a Project Management Plan (portions of which might be made publicly available). I can't really go in to too much detail right now, but if there is interest in some of the behind the scenes work that goes into 0 A.D., I'm sure I can think up a few ways to keep the community informed.

Very interesting ideas, RadioFoot! Currently the 0 A.D. team is focusing on core gameplay so any seasonal changes, for the time being, will only be cosmetic. Right now we can't promise seasonal dynamics (i.e. seasons affect gameplay) will make it into the final game, unless some enterprising programmer(s) takes the time to submit a patch for it. We hope that by making the source code freely available, features like this can be added to the game by community contributors, while the core team focuses on engine and core gameplay development.

Wear a helmet from now on. We can't afford to lose 0 A.D. fans! Seriously though, be more careful & I'm happy you're alright.

After looking at some numbers, 25% bonus seems like a pretty big advantage to me. 100% / 80% / 75%/ 50% 100 / 80 / 75 / 50 500 / 400 / 375 / 250 1000 / 800 / 750 / 500 A 20% may not be much of an incentive to build mills, but around 25% there is a fairly noticeable gap. I think players should feel rewarded for building mills, not punished for not building them (except in multiplayer of course). I'd be interesting in hearing some more people's thoughts on this. *rallies the troops*

20% is a little rough, don't you think? I think 50-75% would be more reasonable (66.66% would be 1/3 decrease, for reference) . I like the underlying idea though.

Welcome to the forums DimitriRUS! I think it is great that you're interested in 0 A.D. and looking to create a historically accurate mod. One question I do have is how do you plan to balance nearly 20 different factions? Will they just be different cosmetically or will each faction have its own unit stats & technology tree?

First of all, welcome to the forums! I am a little confused by your post. Did you mean we should make a section on the forums with information for new forum users?