Jump to content

SMST

Community Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    536

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by SMST

  6. First Person View / Control unit mode

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by SMST

    Sidenote on the screen: Greek Chi (χ) transliterates to "ch", not "x". So, αρχιτέκτων -> architékton. Which would be the proper form, instead of architektonas. (which is accusative plural form)

    For the usefulness of the feature:

    Well ... I don't think it is needed. If 0 A.D. were to go there, the graphics had to look good in both 1st and 3rd person view and it would surely causing lags, as in Rise&Fall.

    Edit:

    I noticed the terrible spelling of "Akhadhmia". Seriously, what source do you guys have?

  7. "false" civilizations

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    If it could be done with 90% accuracy for Etruscans and Sikels (using a Greek base?) then that would enable a Syracuse scenario as a tutorial.

    That is very true. Another thing that would be great.

    Although lately, I am leaning towards a "Sack of Rome" - tutorial. To have the Celts in somewhere.

  10. "false" civilizations

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    The Greeks could be turned to Macedonians easily enough.

    Hoplites -> Pezhetairos

    Thracian Peltast -> Agranian Peltast

    Cretan Archer -> same

    Hippeus -> Prodromos (might change to Spear Cavalry)

    Same goes for Republican Romans -> Samnites. Maybe it would be not 100% accurate, but i think we can reach 90% at least ... it is for scenario purposes after all. I don't think it should be implemented in skirmish or multipayer.

  12. "false" civilizations

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Well ... perhaps not for dinosaurs.:ok:

    But other than that, I could see such aesthetical replacement. Could be helpful if one wants a scenario with Macedonians (visual replacement of Greeks), Samnites (Romans), Germanics/Dacians/Thracians (Celts?), Numidians (Carthaginians), Indians/Scythians (Persians) and such.

    The question is if the WFG team is willing to do the art. (which would, as I understand your idea, oshron, the only thing that would be needed)

  14. post-0 AD idea: mythology

    in Game Modification

    Posted

    bacon

    I agree, some tasty bacon is never wrong.

    But other than that, I see no relevance in your post.

    @oshron:

    Since England really just partipicated in the Third Crusade, (and even then, the English Crusaders would be largely of Norman kin, thus speaking French) I wouldn't choose English as a language. You could choose Middle High German or the French of that time. (don't really know if it is Provencal or something else) I would go for French, since the maiority of the crusaders have always been French. Then again, the two major knight orders who estabilshed there (Johannites and Templars) were from the HRE and they would be an obvious choice for chivalric heroes in your case.

    Your simplification would actually be like 0 A.D.'s subfaction selecting, as far as it is planned. I would prefer it that way.

  15. Alpha feedback

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I have to say, I like the second temple building which Vingauld linked.

    http://img180.imageshack.us/i/gournaysurarronde2eevch.gif/

    The inner building, perhaps? :)

    @Vingauld: Are you a student of archaeology/history? I always feel somewhat dumbed down if I think I know something in my high-school half-knowledge about history and a person, which is actually STUDYING the subject turns up and crumbles my beliefs. :ok::)

    @plumo: If there would be a seperate British and Gaul faction, one could make the Vingauld Temple as temple building for Gaul and the Megalith (I agree that Stonehenge should be a campaign structure) as the British Temple.

  16. Alpha feedback

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    However, it is also true that they often built corridors around some 'places of worship', mostly a simple palisade wall. Druids were responsible for these (maintenance, sacrifices) ( Nemeton , in greek I think) So it became a sort of primitive temple. Because of this (wooden materials) almost no remains are left of course, especially because the Romans heavily persecuted and wiped out druidism.

    I heard about primitive temples, but I thought they were not very widespread.

    Whether the Celts actively worshipped their gods in pre-existing Megalithic remnants is something I should delve deeper into.

    Well, I base this up on this Article of WFG (myth six: druids). While it is a interesting read, it does not cite any sources and therefore may be easily proven wrong.

  17. Alpha feedback

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Why does the Celtic temple look like Stonehenge :'(

    Because in reality, the Celts had no temples and worshipped their gods in the open nature.

    I see your point, though. Prior to the Celts, there was a megalithic culture in Western Europe who built the great monuments such as Stonehenge, Carnac and the like. However, I assume the developers of 0 A.D. follow the theory that the druids used the megalithic monuments to their own purposes, thus making it "sacred places" of the Celts.

    Remember that this is a game, no history simulation.:ok:

×
×
  • Create New...