Experience Level System

[rjs23]

I am curious to know if there will be some kind of Experience Leveling system similar to AoE III. I've read some post that some people in AoE III dislikes the experience level system for various of reasons like it made it feel so un-related to AoE II.

Edit: Maybe they can add feature that toggles experience level system off/on if people dont like the system

Edited February 10, 2010 by rjs23

[Mythos_Ruler]

The game does not use XP like in AOE3. In AOE3 is was used to buy shipment cards from Home Cities. In 0 A.D. individual units will upgrade from Basic to Advanced to Elite based on their experience.

[rjs23]

Ah so like a unit kill every 10 units, it increases it's rank thus increasing attack dmg, hitpoint, regeneration etc?

That is a neat idea would it be possible to add custom ranks to it?

like

Basic->Advanced->Elite->->Veteran-> Hero->Legendary->Master

[Mythos_Ruler]

Yeah, more rank levels would definitely be possible to mod into the game. Very easy actually, as leveling to the next level is accomplished with one line of code in the entity xml scripts.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Mythos_Ruler

[phil44]

Personally i hated the experience and homecity/card system of aoe3 (my least favourite aoe for that reason), the main reason being that it discouraged playing as different civilisations, since you would be focussed on leveling up one civ. It just detracted from the feel of previous aoe games. And the homecity shipments had this effect aswell, just didn't feel like previous aoe games, where you would have to build up your army, and gather the necessary resources, rather than relying heavily on home city shipments.

I do like the idea of individual units gaining experience though. Would this be a persistant thing or on an individual match basis. It might make sense to have persistant units in a single player campaign, however i'm not sure it would really work all that well across random skirmishes.

[Mythos_Ruler]

It's just on a match-by-match basis.

[phil44]

Yeh that would make the most sense. With a singleplayer campaign i was meaning like hero units or essential campaign units, which would gain experience throughout the campaign, although im not sure that would workout too well. There would have to be some limits, or maybe have the hero unit be improved occasionally as a direct result of some event in the campaign story. This would all of course depend on the preference of the campaign developer, and would be more of a story element effecting a few select units, rather than a base gameplay element.

[buggy123]

Hmm, personally I thought the AOE3 hc shipment system gave it more depth and strategy. Though it probably wouldn't be appropriate for a game like 0AD.

btw, the hc shipments are suppose to complement your strategy, not determine it. Just saying.

Anyways, this unit experience system will be interesting. Probably be lots of retreating now. xD

btw, do unit ranks affect the stats alot or just a little? (enough to make a very noticeable difference?)

[Mythos_Ruler]

I liked the HC and shipments from AOE3, but I wish it were possible to intercept shipments and stuff like that. I think such a system would be appropriate for 0 A.D., but WFG just doesn't have the manpower to make something like that happen.

[oshron]

personally, i think HC shipments would work better simulated by triggers in a campaign, where your base is further to the center of the map and shipped units must walk from the edge of the map to your town before you can use them, bringing along caravan something or others that provide resources

[darthturtle]

That could be expanded into a "supply line"! That could open up some interesting options during a game

[Garick]

Personal experience and "i guesses" from me:

- Age of Empires II Shippments from home citye:

that was cool on the beggining, and the deck building could really do you win by obliteration, what caused the gameplay on multiplayer be more based on how good you build the home citye tham the actual meelee combat with swords classhing and bullets flying. for finish: very nice, but not useful for balance.

- One think that i love in starcraft (and total anihilation) is the "kill count" on units, really, its awesome see the number of units that your unit send to the gates of oblivion. This, toghether with an experience system would be cool. I will show my idea bellow:

For example (because i don't know the upgrades and sutff, so i will use AOK).

You have your unit, a paladin for say!

- Your paladin earn experience points for each unit he kills, but diferente units should give diferente experience points, because killing a villager is ultra-easy, but kill a pikeman or a camel, for a paladin is a hard-day task. So, basica-ly, diferente units will give diferente ammounts of XP for diferent Units.

- The other case would be spend experience points (that you earn too) and gold to hire mercenaries, that would work like elite units or even Heroes for your troops.

Well, would like to hear your feedback, to know if my ideas are dumb or what

[Bladex1200]

What they could do (for an expansion) is merge the "kill count" and "home city" ideas, similar to kill streaks in Modern Warfare 2. Now I know bringing an FPS idea into RTS territory is strange, but hear me out.

If X number of units achieves Y number of kills (same unit, if unit dies than it doesn't count), then you receive word from your nation's capital that they're willing to reinforce you as a sign of their approval. You can pick several reinforcements:

- resource boosts (self-explanatory)

- expeditionary force (small army controlled by allied AI that helps you in combat)

- direct reinforcements (small army that YOU control arrives on the battlefield)

The reinforcements take time to arrive, and when they reach the map they must be defended before they arrive in the form of ships (on water maps) or caravans (on land maps). Of course, each civilization would have different reinforcement bonuses, and each army's caravans and ships look different to help differentiate them in the heat of combat.

The supply train must reach either a nearby player-owned port or allied port (if it's water reinforcement) or a nearby either player town center or allied town center (if it's a land caravan). This would mean that capturing as many as possible or building as many ports as possible is crucial, otherwise your reinforcements run the risk of being intercepted.

If reinforcements are intercepted, the enemy can sink them and receive bonus resources OR the enemy can hold them hostage and receive equal reimbursement for the caravan (ie. if the reinforcement caravan carried an allied army, then the enemy gains an allied army). Looting the caravans produces equal resources to the cost of making the army inside the caravan.

Comments on my weird idea?

[Kimball]

Interesting idea. For the three, I wouldn't see anyone choosing the expeditionary force over direct reinforcements. You'd be best off having two packages of different units to cater to your needs (ie. one group of infantry/cavalry or a group of siege+hero).

I don't like the thought of integrating AoE3's trading post system. I much preferred AoM's method of trade: sending caravans from one market to another, given that the market on the receiving end is owned by you or an ally. Instead of sending actual units though, perhaps just creating a trade line between two markets would automatically send your merchants on their way unless you specifically pull them away from it. This system would also better support your "looting" idea.

[Radagast]

It would be neat if a unit could gain experience in specific skills rather than a making a generic level; Farmers gradually get better at farming, builders at construction and repair, and warriors at melee/archery/horsemanship... etc. This could conceivably allow units such as elite engineers- citizen soldiers that perform equally well at living off the land, constructing siege works and fortifications, and still fight superlatively- the Roman Legionary springs to mind. Anyway, I'm not sure if that kind of detail could be implemented in this engine, but just in case, I think it would make for some pretty impressive gameplay.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Such detail can be implemented easily, however 0 A.D.'s game design does not include such distinction between soldiers and farmers (for instance). In 0 A.D. farmers are soldiers.

Edited April 28, 2010 by Mythos_Ruler

[Aldandil]

I think he means that if a citizen-soldier performed one type of task more often than the others, they'd level up into a different kind of unit, such as a more-efficient farmer who isn't any better at battle or building. I don't know whether such a unit would really be useful, but I think it's what he means.

[Radagast]

Aldandil is a bit nearer the mark with what I intended- the citizen-soldiers don't necessarily level up into a new unit, but gains proficiency at certain tasks. A citizen who has spent over 1 game-minute of building gains a mark in the 'construction' category and consequently builds 5% faster; subsequent marks hike that bonus up as he/she becomes more proficient. This would not have to be a very overt occurrence, perhaps not even being visible to the player at all- just a tip of the hat to the fact that initial training is the starting point, not the apex.

[Mythos_Ruler]

That's not a bad idea. It would take some scripting, but the engine could handle it, from what little I know about entity code.

However, I wouldn't do it in a game where you might have 200 such citizen-soldiers. It would be pretty awesome though if the game used a battalion system and you could customize your battalions in such a way.

[plumo]

Not an original idea

There was a game called Highland Warriors, a terrible AOK-clone which had an 'experience' system like that. Your villagers received experience doing certain tasks, making them better in woodcutting f.e. but worse in foraging...

According to me it is very difficult to find a right balance between too much micromanagement and the effect of the bonusses.

The idea sounds interesting I admit, but is it worth the effort?

[Mythos_Ruler]

I think it would be too much micro management. You'd have to take micro away from something else, IMHO. The one plus side is that the leveling is automatic. Still you have to micro which villagers go where then, based on their ever changing skillset.