New Civ for Alpha 28+?

[chrstgtr]

1 hour ago, Yekaterina said:

It's just a game, no need to be perfectly historically accurate.

 

That's my point--excluding American civs for "historical" reasons is silly

3 hours ago, Genava55 said:

I simply mean they are not interacting with any current civs

3 hours ago, Genava55 said:

Actually I am in favor of having American civs.

These two statements can't coexist. Until you start adding American civ then no new American civ will ever have any real historical connections during 0ad's timeframe.

Besides, it's a game. It's not a historical simulation. Sparta and Athens both existed at the same time and did interact with each other. We don't need the game to perfectly replay every one of their interactions. If the outcome was already determined then it wouldn't be a game. 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

16 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

That's my point--excluding American civs for "historical" reasons is silly

These two statements can't coexist. Until you start adding American civ then no new American civ will ever have any real historical connections during 0ad's timeframe.

Besides, it's a game. It's not a historical simulation. Sparta and Athens both existed at the same time and did interact with each other. We don't need the game to perfectly replay every one of their interactions. If the outcome was already determined then it wouldn't be a game. 

I'm think a "Nomads" alpha release (Scythians and Xiongnu) and a "Mesoamerican" alpha release (Zapotecs and Maya) would be really cool.

[chrstgtr]

45 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I'm think a "Nomads" alpha release (Scythians and Xiongnu) and a "Mesoamerican" alpha release (Zapotecs and Maya) would be really cool.

Yeah, I want both. All I'm saying is that I'm not keen on the logic that would always exclude American civs  

Edited February 11, 2023 by chrstgtr

[Genava55]

49 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

These two statements can't coexist. Until you start adding American civ then no new American civ will ever have any real historical connections during 0ad's timeframe.

Maybe you are not getting my point. They won't have any interactions with the current civs. Ever. They were historically and geographically disconnected. You cannot add a missing link. Furthermore, we don't know their history. There is only a few inscriptions known from this period and we don't have any info about the events they lived. 

We can't name a battle they fought or a king they had at this time. It is only much later we know their history better.

I am simply saying I don't think they are the priority. That's my opinion and I don't have any weight on the decision.

1 hour ago, chrstgtr said:

Besides, it's a game. It's not a historical simulation. Sparta and Athens both existed at the same time and did interact with each other. We don't need the game to perfectly replay every one of their interactions. If the outcome was already determined then it wouldn't be a game. 

Sure. Anyway from a pragmatic pov, the Maya and Zapotecs have some very strong arguments: they have 3D models. Something 0 A.D. is desperately looking for. 

[chrstgtr]

3 minutes ago, Genava55 said:

They were historically and geographically disconnected.

You're missing my point. It's a game, not a simulation. And, your statement that you want American civs cannot exist if you believe the above. 

[Yekaterina]

To settle the argument, what about add 2 or 3 civs at the same time?

Hyrule conquest does 5 at a time so it's not too much for Empires Ascendant to do 3 right?

Best candidates in my opinion:

1. Zapotecs (The most complete American civ so far)

2. Xiongnu / Scythians (These 2 are essentially the same, a completely new play style)

3. Lusitans - a very complete civ ready for balancing and implementation. Although I do feel it's a bit repetitive to have so many Celts / Iberians.

 

[real_tabasco_sauce]

1 hour ago, Genava55 said:

geographically disconnected.

well it is one globe you are right that it would have been quite a trip.

I don't think the historical accuracy of any two civ's realistically fighting each other is fit for a videogame. After all we do want more content right?

Plus, if more than one American civ is added, it could be conceivable or even historically verifiable that they fought each other.

2 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I'm think a "Nomads" alpha release (Scythians and Xiongnu) and a "Mesoamerican" alpha release (Zapotecs and Maya) would be really cool.

I think this is a great way to proceed.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

10 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

I don't think the historical accuracy of any two civ's realistically fighting each other is fit for a videogame. After all we do want more content right?

 

ehhhh, I think it's a legit criticism or concern if your game has a specific theme. But 0 A.D. has evolved a lot over the past 20 years and I wouldn't personally see a problem with it. Perhaps do the nomads first, then branch to the Zapos and Mayas.

 

1 hour ago, Yekaterina said:

3. Lusitans - a very complete civ ready for balancing and implementation. Although I do feel it's a bit repetitive to have so many Celts / Iberians.

The current Lusitanian mod is not up to snuff, but it could be made up to snuff. We need more 3D modelers.

[Yekaterina]

I have an idea: in vanilla we add both zapo and nomads, but in the community mod we don't add anything. So, if the non hardcore players get used to these 2 civs gradually, then we can implement them into community mod after taking balancing advice from them.

 

 

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

2 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

I have an idea: in vanilla we add both zapo and nomads, but in the community mod we don't add anything. So, if the non hardcore players get used to these 2 civs gradually, then we can implement them into community mod after taking balancing advice from them.

You mean, disable them in the Comm mod? 

[AIEND]

6 hours ago, CovenantKillerJ said:

True, but I believe that this shouldn't be a limitation as these civilizations were advanced in other ways, and therefore can be balanced in different ways for example cheaper, weaker units and etc. We see tribal mercenary units such as the Noba for the kushites not using much metal and have more weapon stat damage than some units for other civs using metal. And personally I don't find the discrepancy as that large as we are talking about the iron age compared to aoe3 which is muskets and gunpowder.

There is also the fact that alot of civs don't use much iron armour; the celts use iron weapons and very little armour earlier on and the Kushites still rely on alot of bronze armour and lighter materials. So from this I believe that civs with no metal can compete.

The progress of American civilization, such as city construction, may be reflected in some construction and operation games, but it is not suitable for RTS such as 0AD, because in the final analysis, this game is about fighting, and the problem of American civilization at this time is There are no domesticated horses, no metal weapons, no wheels, so there are no cavalry, chariots, and battering rams, which makes it difficult for them to compete with the existing civilizations of the game. In addition, AoE3 appears in the 15th century and later Native Americans , and if we try to join American civilization now, its level of civilization is still far from the most mature state in 1,500 years.
I am more optimistic about the pre-colonial American mods that only have American civilization, because the combat modes of all factions are similar, without iron, cavalry and chariots.

[Yekaterina]

Just now, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

You mean, disable them in the Comm mod

Precisely. The new stuff get put in the vanilla version but only the very balanced civs in community mod.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

18 minutes ago, Yekaterina said:

Precisely. The new stuff get put in the vanilla version but only the very balanced civs in community mod.

Not to make this a community mod discussion, but I don't think the community mod should be a balanced version of the game for competitive games. This would solidify the existing division it has created in the community. I think the mod is better off as a testing ground for balance changes and some content additions (ie centurions).

In an alternative plan to @Yekaterina's, new civs could be added to a release (hopefully in a fairly well balanced state, Han was an example although their balance is still questioned by some). After release, community mod efforts could include live balance patches for the new civs. In a26, there were no balance patches to Han, only a bugfix, however one was attempted for crossbows.

Edited February 11, 2023 by real_tabasco_sauce

[Yekaterina]

It's okay if a new civ causes imbalance in vanilla, the community mod will push for a solution then the balanced version will be implemented in A29

[Genava55]

8 hours ago, chrstgtr said:

You're missing my point. It's a game, not a simulation. And, your statement that you want American civs cannot exist if you believe the above. 

I don't see how they are contradicting. If I am exposing the issues, this is not a testimony against their inclusion. This is a talk, to discuss efficiently everyone should be able to expose its view. I am simply highlighting that it could be a challenge.

And even if it is a game, it takes its inspiration from history and try to depict the civs fairly.

American civs are really a rupture in this regard because they are prehistorical. We don't have any accounts about them. Furthermore their gameplay would be radically different.

Currently they have generic heroes. They don't rely on metal. They don't have cavalry. They don't have siege engines. Their navy is not remarquable. Animal husbandry raised for food is limited to turkeys and dogs. It will be difficult to balance them. 

Edit: Even for a single player campaign, they have limitations. So my point on their prehistorical situation, is that it has impact on their inclusion. This is not something we can dismiss or ignore easily. It has consequences.

Edited February 11, 2023 by Genava55

[Lion.Kanzen]

On 02/01/2023 at 7:38 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

.

Along with Zapotecs they're in the wrong hemisphere. Just figured they'd be less likely choices. 

accidental transatlantic voyages.

https://www.gaia.com/article/out-of-place-artifacts

"In Brazil’s Guanabara Bay a sunken shipwreck was discovered appearing to be the remains of an ancient Roman ship. Among the submerged ruins were a number of large terracotta amphorae, tall jars that were made during the Roman empire.

 

The jars were dated between the 1st century BC and 3rd century AD, definitively proving their origin from the Roman Empire. This type of pottery was used to transport anything from wine, to olive oil, and grains."

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

10 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

Xiongnu / Scythians (These 2 are essentially the same, a completely new play style)

they still need polishing that meta-gameplay.

And we need the fort-carts.They have nomadic defenses. Wagon based.

[Lion.Kanzen]

4 hours ago, Genava55 said:

And even if it is a game, it takes its inspiration from history and try to depict the civs fairly.

American civs are really a rupture in this regard because they are prehistorical. We don't have any accounts about them. Furthermore their gameplay would be radically different.

Currently they have generic heroes. They don't rely on metal. They don't have cavalry. They don't have siege engines. Their navy is not remarquable. Animal husbandry raised for food is limited to turkeys and dogs. It will be difficult to balance them. 

It's a game, don't forget.

It is not realistic with the gameplay.

Historically, American viva can capture horses (stables)

Both in North and South America they managed to ride a horse by themselves.

North American.

 

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

4 hours ago, Genava55 said:

They don't have siege engines.

siege towers. it's more of a platform.

 

 

Edited February 11, 2023 by Lion.Kanzen

[Genava55]

49 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

In Brazil’s Guanabara Bay a sunken shipwreck was discovered appearing to be the remains of an ancient Roman ship. Among the submerged ruins were a number of large terracotta amphorae, tall jars that were made during the Roman empire.

 

The jars were dated between the 1st century BC and 3rd century AD, definitively proving their origin from the Roman Empire. This type of pottery was used to transport anything from wine, to olive oil, and grains."

This story is very dubious. The remains are not accessible to anyone, the guy kept everything and doesn't let anyone access it.

[Genava55]

34 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

It's a game, don't forget.

It is not realistic with the gameplay.

Historically, American viva can capture horses (stables)

Both in North and South America they managed to ride a horse by themselves.

North American.

 

 

How do you think we can implement the capture of enemy's horses?

Or are saying they should have cavalry at the start ?

34 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

siege towers. it's more of a platform.

Siege towers during the protoclassic period? Or is this evidence from the classical period?

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 minute ago, Genava55 said:

This story is very dubious. The remains are not accessible to anyone, the guy kept everything and doesn't let anyone access it.

obviously like many things in the new world.

I do not rule out some accident or miracle.

It's not impossible either.

Both the Norse and the Polynesians demonstrated that it is possible to reach the continental land.

 

The problem is the Atlantic sea.  is brave and unpredictable.

Again we go to the point of 0 A.D

Iberians fighting with Chinese, isn't it absurd too? 

[Lion.Kanzen]

2 minutes ago, Genava55 said:

How do you think we can implement the capture of enemy's horses?

Capturing stables. but limiting the cost and number of units.This did AoE II with the Native Americans.

Just now, Lion.Kanzen said:

Capturing stables. but limiting the cost and number of units.This did AoE II with the Native Americans.

In fact almost the same should be done with Indian and African elephants.

[Yekaterina]

22 minutes ago, Genava55 said:

How do you think we can implement the capture of enemy's horses?

Separate the horse rider template and the horse template, then study the capture of catafalques or siege towers from A23 code, then implement those into the horse part. The technical part should be manageable.

[Genava55]

22 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Iberians fighting with Chinese, isn't it absurd too? 

Yes. But the point is that the Iberians are related to the history of multiple people. Their participation to the Punic Wars, their renown as mercenaries etc.

While the Maya people and the Zapotecs are not related to anyone among the current civs. We don't even know any event from this period.