SMST
-
Posts
536 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by SMST
-
-
HOOOLD on a second, everypony. Why were civs hardcoded in the first place?
-
Great maps! These should definitely be included in the next release, all of them.
A tiny note: You may try to give the continent a less circular shape and make it more natural. I don't know how hard this would be from a scripting point of view, but those circle-continents always bugged me in every RTS that has the "Continent" option.
-
About the Caballero Turdetano thing: It was me who made these units for personal use, and they were orignially not be intended to be used in the official version. They got included in the latest Alpha by courtesy of the devs, and the name (of whom I know was not accurate, but didn't bother to research, since I wasn't aware that anyone else would see this) got carried with the unit template. But they were inspired by an image of Cantabrian Cavalry (I think from a TW mod), which is why I gave them that generic name. I am glad this error is corrected.
Oh, an I am all in favor of getting a Iberian Cswordman in, and kicking the double Caetratus out in its favor. Perhaps the Iswordman could get a secondary/initial javelin attack, just like there are plans of giving the Roman infantry some. Then we could lose the Ijavelinist.
Also, I was amazed to get a representation of the elongated/stressed vocals in the Greek transcription. Though the name for the fortress shouldn't be "Teíkhisma", but "Teíchisma".
-
I would have went with a more common Egyptian symbol like the Ankh, the Scarabaeus or the Horus-Eye, but this ist interesting. What does it stand for?
-
That's great!
Pity I cannot get a current SVN here at this public PC.:/ (which is also slow as hell)
-
About the Persian Stables (now new in the public SVN). Is this going to be a new "regular structure", e.g. will the Hellenes, Celts etc. all get a Stable of their own - or is this a specific Persian structure?
-
I wonder if there was even anything in the books about High Elven architecture. The Silvan Elves' caves in Mirkwood were described in The Hobbit, but Rivendell was not.
-
Carthage gets a huge trading boost once trading is implemented. That should balance the high Metal requirements I guess.
-
Hmm. I'd be interested in a Tolkien Mod for 0 A.D. myself. Then again, I am interested in too many things right now.
I like much of the concept of TLA, for example the faction/age selection that was released on the home page.
-
Can you tell me why?First (I think around 2007) they were going to be Cavalry Swordsmen, but that was discarded for historical inaccuracy. (Ancient Arabian Camelry didn't really fight in close combat) Then they were spec'd as Cav. Javelinists (the current textures of the Persian CavJav are representing Miditanite costumes), but then they got replaced by Median Cavalry, which was way more common in the Persian army. I can't think of a place for them in the unit roster now, so I assume they got scrapped.
-
where to build the Usabari (Camelry)? And will there be a feature, that camels make horses go crazy, even own horses.
There will be no Camelry for the Persians now, I think.
-
Maybe there could be stumps added in places where deplenished trees stood. This would be a good indicator for a player to see where trees will eventually grow back. (if not blocked by something else)
As for Metal, Empire Earth solved it in a way that there were mines with a(practically) infinite amount of ressources, but with a limit of people mining. Maybe that would be something to think about.
-
I would like that very much. Although due to lack of skills (at the moment - I try to learn) I cannot contribute, it would be very interesting to watch (and comment
) the progress of the game art. -
I got the translations from theoi.com. The author of that website sources everything directly from the ancient texts and pots, though he mostly reads translations.
Hm, I never came across that word, and my online dictionary doesn't know it. My more extensive dictionary lies in a different part of Germany.
I just have to believe you - or the guy at theoi.com, for that matter - in this.@oshron: As I said, it would be "hus gigantes" then.
-
The problem with pyramids is that they were only built in the Old Kingdom, and even the small ones were HUGE. The requirements to build one would have to be "all the stone on the map."
I vaguely remember reading about Pyramids with a core of mudbricks being built during the New Kingdom. That may be wrong, though. And if the bonus they would give is worth it, they could very well be the most expensive (2500 stone or something) and most long-to-build structure in the game.
-
There has to be a place for buildable Pyramids in an Egyptian faction. Maybe we can think of some bonus regarding the afterlife cult of Ancient Egypt? (I can't at the moment.)
As far as heroes go, I would suggest Hatschepsut (the more female heroes one can get, the better), Thutmose III. (the most expansive Pharaoh) and Ramesses II. (the most iconic Pharaoh)
I also think that one of the Champion Units should be a "Sherden" Warband, the bodyguard of the Pharaoh, recruited from the various Libyan tribes or the "Sea People".
-
EDIT: im not sure which of these names would be best as a replacement for "Erymanthian Boar": either Hus Gigantes or Gigantes Hus. the latter seems more accurate, but the former has more of a ring to it. thoughts?
Where do you get that name from, anyway? Greek for "boar" is either "syagrios" (meaning literally "pig wild") or "kapros". "Erymanthian" would be something like "Erymanthôn", "Gigantês" means "giant", if anything.
Regardless, the word order for Greek (and Latin) words is: substantive first, adjective(s) follow. So it would be "Hus Gigantes" and not "Gigantes Hus".
-
I would add both a Non-Western pack for both timespans (500 BC - 500 AD) and a Middle Eastern Pack roughly covering the time BEFORE Part I. (meaning 1000 BC - 500 BC) My list would look like this:
- Part I
Carthaginians
Celts (Gaul/Britain)
Hellenes (Poleis/Macedon)
Iberians
Persians
Pre-Imperial Romans - Part II
West Romans
East Romans
Huns
Parthians/Sassanids
Germanics (Goths, Saxons, Vandals, Franks)
Dacians - Part III - pre 0 A.D.
Egyptians
Hittites
Assyrians
Babylonians
Scythians
Israelites - Part IV - non-Roman
Mayans
Yamato Japan
Han China
Maurya India
Axumites
?? (Koreans? maybe a second Chinese faction, corresponding to the "Spring and Autumn" and "Warring States" period?)
these are just suggestions. i dont know too much about many of the "Roman" civilizations here, but personally think that including some civilizations from outside the original scope of the game would be good for variety and scenario design. i dont know about you guys, but i would LOVE to play a scenario with historically accurate romans sailing across the sea to fight historically accurate mayans
I agree.
- Part I
-
The SVN has a 'Persians Sandbox' scenario under the Demo sort. You can mess with everything there.
It has not. Not in the public SVN, anyway.
-
Nice stuff! I don't know much about the late Empire, but here are some thoughts:
1. As I understood, the Kathaphraktoi were more lightly armoured, but had bows as well as lances and maces. The Klibanophoroi/Clibanarii were heavier armoured and relied soley on melee power. So my idea would be to make the Klibanophoroi the Cavalry Spearmen and the Kataphraktoi the Champion Cavalry (for switching melee/ranged power) OR (if you dearly want to have the Scolae Palatinae as Champion Cav) the Cavalry Archer class (which would be more heavily armoured, but slower and more expensive than Hunnic or Parthian CAs)
2. As I understand it, this could be a possible infantry setup for the Byzantines:
Infantry Slinger: Staff slinger
Infantry Archer: Trebizond Archer (I read somewhere the finest archers of Byzantium came from Trebizond at the Black Sea
Infantry Javelinist: Either Plumbata throwers (though I think these bolts might be better off as a secondary weapon for melee infantry, akin to Pila of Part I) or (my preferred solution) Foederati Javelinists (Germanic).
To represent the Limitanei/Comitanenses issue, I suggest representing the Limitanei as Infantry Spearmen (and initial melee infantry at game start) for their guarding, defensive role (which Spearmen have in the game) and the Comitanenses as Infantry Swordsmen (the main offensive arm) as they were, as I understood it, used for campaigns rather then guard duties.
This gives the Byzantines all (CS) Infantry Classes (5) plus two CS Cavalry Classes (maybe someone else can think of a third kind of cavalry), a setup that is similar to the Carthaginians of part I (though with different nuances) and represents the cosmopolitan nature of the Late Empire quite well, I think. Maybe someone with more knowledge will see fit to correct me.
-
1
-
-
Some Persian units look really great, though I understand that they are subject to change. Change heavily.
I'm not too crazy about scale armoured Median Spearmen. I thought Persian foot troops should be lightly armoured at best.
Also, where be camels?
Edit: Lovely little video, asmartgoat.
(great job with the music mixing!) -
I still think the trade ship doesn't look like a trade ship.
-
I'd bet Meg plays WoW.
-
They used it to reinforce the sails, as most sails probably weren't made out of one full sheet of cloth
Probably. Could be a bit more subtle IMHO.
Bireme, maybe not. Getting ready for the Carths atm
That is excellent. Although the Bireme needs some improvement, in my opinion.
New Civs
in Game Modification
Posted · Edited by SMST
What he said.