Jump to content

SDM

Donator
  • Posts

    122
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by SDM

  1. Oh, I thought it was implemented when near trees like in BMFE2. Since day/night cycle is not scheduled to be in this release, I think stealth near trees would be better (and more faction-specific than stealth when idle at night, which I think should be unit-specific.)

    Edit: Possibly have it so that Iberians can be stealthed when idle depending on geography may work to emphasize ambush placements. For example, when Iberians are near a mountain or valley or forested terrain, they will be automatically stealthed when not in combat and not moving. Does the terrain store any other information besides height at this point in development?

  2. I meant a dense forest (with no pathing through)...

    To add to the idea, why not make it so that a certain civilization (in this case, Iberians) have units that can ghost through trees by ignoring collision detection? Sort of like how Star Craft miners ignore collision. Perhaps that in order to balance this, can only attack when they're not colliding with trees.

    Another idea would be to borrow from the two most well-known MOBAs. Both League of Legends and DOTA have bushes that grant the players invisibility, which would work well for ambushes (and it's a huge gameplay element). This idea is less faction-specific than the one above, however.

    Finally, simply have the Iberians be stealthed when near trees. I believe that Warcraft III's Night Elves and LOTR BFME2 Elves did something to this effect. I'm no programmer, but this sounds like the most conservative option available.

    • Like 1
  3. Can someone confirm that this can't be done in the current Alpha? I'm hopeful that scripting/tabling will allow this to work without programming.

    e: If it can't be done at the moment, I'm certain that it will be possible at some point in time. Suicidal Units, Aura Effects, and Damage-Over-Time effects have been a staple of RTS since Warcraft.

  4. If we really need to see nudity* and more blood, someone is bound to make an unofficial "Rated M" mod. I'm assuming the game itself is going to be released with a E Rating in mind.

    *While I don't necessarily believe that nudity for historical accuracy's sake is particularly offensive, I can understand that some people may have some misgivings about nudity in general, and it seems more acceptable to censor nudity in this situation than to allow it in order to allow more people to enjoy the game.

    • Like 2
  5. I'm okay with WFG not reporting what they've done with our money yet if there is no visible progress as long as they're still working on it. And I know they're still working on it. An update every month regarding the status of the funds is not as essential as plowing through technical hurdles. I feel that the lack of transparencies allow for more experimentation and risks, something I'm very okay with. After all, the fund raiser was pretty much an investment opportunity (with the goal of having an an awesome game in return), and not all of our money is going to be spent on value-added services.

    • Like 1
  6. Just to make things clear, would it be "easy" to mod a civilization so that they can build roads that increase walking speed of all units? This would be irrespective of path-finding for reasons stated above and unofficial because it conflicts with the design goals for the game.

    Just in case a modding team wants to mod a Road Micromanagement Mod, for example.

  7. Here's a book that has a transcriptions of Egyptian Hieroglyphics. The e-book itself is only $8, but even the preview seems useful. I don't know whether all or most of the transcriptions are when the Demotic language was spoken, but it's a great source nonetheless.

    As an example, Lion.Kazen's transliteration of temple is .hw.t-ntr. The transliteration in this book has it spelled He-t for the first part of the word, which is more "pronounceable" than the transliteration.

    Source: http://books.google.com/books?id=WUppj1LHdJ4C&pg=PR6&dq=temple&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LjuKUu7mCIKiyAGmw4H4Dg&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=temple&f=false

    • Like 1
  8. Indeed. I would also argue that geographic barriers can and do split single cultures into many. Unless you can validly prove that the "Celts" and the "Germanics" share the same cultures and languages, I wouldn't consider grouping them together, just like how it wouldn't be fair to group all Amerindian peoples together even as subfactions.

    Archeological sources and linguistics are the best tools we have, contrary to what one member in this thread may say. I wouldn't rely on genetics as much.

  9. SDM : For one level, which units should it put under alert ? All or female or workers ?

    At the moment, I would say all. Manually canceling units from garrisoning should be easier than manually adding units to a garrison, and I don't trust simple heuristics to micromanage my game for me, anyway.

    On a different tangent, I think it's also more mod-friendly if it's not hard-coded to distinguish female workers from other workers (soft-coding is fine provided the modders can easily change it). For example, mods with only one type of workers or mods where female workers are more proficient in combat.

    • Like 2
  10. NoMolester has a point. Being a nation isn't even a criteria to becoming a playable faction to begin with (see Athens and Sparta).

    If the work required to make a minifaction is equivalent or greater than the work required to create a playable faction, then the minifaction should either be made a playable faction or scrapped. I am not commenting on the specifics of your idea, but this axiom should be a factor in developing a minifaction as opposed to a playable faction.

    Diversity is a great if it can be implemented in a reasonable fashion. What is considered reasonable is for the content creators to decide. But from a player's perspective, a minifaction that acts exactly like or very similarly to a normal faction but is unplayable is very far from being reasonable.

    The point of this thread is to discuss/debate the merits of ways to implement minifactions. We should therefore be serious in discussing how minifactions should be implemented; and if we see something we believe to be a bad idea, we should respectfully point it out and explain why the idea is bad. The alternative is groupthink, bad ideas/implementations, and uninteresting monologues.

    • Like 1
  11. As long as zentaoaki isn't copying the cheetah exactly, it should be okay.

    http://painting.about.com/cs/artistscopyright/f/copyrightfaq7.htm

    EDIT: Clicking other links from that same site, it seems that it should be a free reference to begin with:

    http://painting.about.com/od/artistreferencephotos/Reference_Photographs_for_Artists.htm

    leads to

    http://painting.about.com/od/artistreferencephotos/ig/Reference-Photos--Cheetahs/

    And here is About.com's terms of use for their photos:

    http://painting.about.com/od/artistreferencephotos/f/FAQTermRefPhoto.htm

×
×
  • Create New...