In-Game Technologies

[oshron]

weaving should be available to all civs that used it, and benefit the health and/or armor of all units as well as enable some other technologies lke the aforementioned linothoraz

[Macgruber]

weaving should be available to all civs that used it, and benefit the health and/or armor of all units as well as enable some other technologies lke the aforementioned linothoraz

Yeah, it might not have been very clear that I intended for the naval speed benefit to be universal.

[Mythos_Ruler]

maybe you could add the ability to set traps

Moats and spikes and stuff would be cool, but they'd have to cover a small area so they'd be effective against 100+ units storming your territory (maybe snaring a dozen or so of the enemy). I'd do that rather than individual traps. Have to make it worth the micro.

[oshron]

maybe spiked trenches could be included for civs which historically used such traps, and they could be constructed similarly to walls. the difference would be that most units can walk over them, but they receive damage for the entire time that theyre on them

[General Octavian]

How about when so many units fall in a trench, the bodies stack up so other units can get across by walking on the bodies

[plumo]

A moat / trench would be nice to have for the Romans. Maybe spiked thorns / stakes as well. ( See: Siege of Alesia).

The moat could slow down unit speed, the stakes could do a sort of attrition damage for units walking through.

If it affects balance too much ,at least include them as special props or structures for the campaign.

[Macgruber]

A moat / trench would be nice to have for the Romans. Maybe spiked thorns / stakes as well. ( See: Siege of Alesia).

The moat could slow down unit speed, the stakes could do a sort of attrition damage for units walking through.

If it affects balance too much ,at least include them as special props or structures for the campaign.

If I remember my roman defensive tactics, and I'm pretty sure I do. How about the "lilies" mentioned in the Commentari de bello Gallico. These "lilies" are commonly referred to as trou de loups, or tiger pits.

My link

[plumo]

If I remember my roman defensive tactics, and I'm pretty sure I do. How about the "lilies" mentioned in the Commentari de bello Gallico. These "lilies" are commonly referred to as trou de loups, or tiger pits.

My link

IMO it would add a lot of micro-management, to place them etc. or avoid them during combat.

[Alpha of the Eagles]

IMO it would add a lot of micro-management, to place them etc. or avoid them during combat.

Perfect.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Perfect.

Well, Micro is good to an extent. Don't want the game to be frustrating though! If we were to ever do something like this, and I'm not saying we will, we'd probably make it a special building-type of thing, where you can only build maybe 1 patch of traps at a time, in crucial places. That way if a formation of enemies falls into it, then that's it. There's not much micro to it. Maybe half the formation manages to walk through the patch and the other half fall into their own little pits of death. lol. I think to the owning player the patch of traps would look like a small area covered with straw. To the enemy they can't see it at all. Then the traps are sprung as the enemy troops fall into it and it is apparent to both. I would make heroes immune to them (they walk right over them, but their less "elite" comrades aren't so nimble).

[Pureon]

I spent a bit of time creating some spiked defences using my palisade wall assets:

Screenshots show a standard fence, tall impassable spikes, and small crossable spikes. The tall impassable wall could damage melee units while it is being destroyed, while the small spikes could deal a small amount of damage when crossed.

[Jubalbarca]

Were caltrops invented by this point?

[feneur]

Were caltrops invented by this point?

At least according to Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caltrop

[Mythos_Ruler]

Were caltrops invented by this point?

Definitely, like at Gaugamela and Alesia.

[aldur]

nice, but the large ones should be "exceedable" (without taking damage) by cavalry

Edited May 2, 2011 by aldur

[Mythos_Ruler]

nice, but the large ones should be "exceedable" (without taking damage) by cavalry

Explain.

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

I actually think that large picket lines should only deal out damage to soldiers that charge them practically head on and especially harm cavalry. (Excepting elephants, which could just bulldoze right through them almost unscathed.) The smaller ones should give minimal damage to the units, but would lower their defenses significantly because they would be too distracted with their feet getting pricked.

[aldur]

nice, but the large ones should be "exceedable" (without taking damage) by cavalry

cavalry is able to jump over those (at least in theory ), so it doesnt take any damage from it;

maybe this way of crossing the pickets could have an animation

[feneur]

cavalry is able to jump over those (at least in theory ), so it doesnt take any damage from it;

maybe this way of crossing the pickets could have an animation

The smaller ones I can see if they could jump over, but the larger ones shouldn't be that small. If they currently are, which is hard to tell without a cavalry unit next to them, they should be made bigger imho.

[Pureon]

I'd say they are tall enough to stop cavalry jumping over them

If these spikes do become functional in 0AD, it'll be after each faction's walls and gates are fully functioning, so for now I'll add them to the Atlas editor as non-functional eyecandy.

[feneur]

If these spikes do become functional in 0AD, it'll be after each faction's walls and gates are fully functioning, so for now I'll add them to the Atlas editor as non-functional eyecandy.