Some Suggestions for 0.A.D.

[Burzum]

I have been looking at the different hellenos civilizations available, (e.g. Macedonians, Spartans, Athenians), but I would also like to see, are Latin ones as well.

Samnites

Samnites were composed of four tribes that resided in Samnium, Pentri, Caraceni, Caudini, Hirpini.

Saminum was a unity of these tribes and they were very strong in early history of Italia.

A typical Samnite soldier

The Samnites had powerful cavalry too.

Etruscans

Many people can't understand the mysterious Etruscans...

These people contributed so much to the Roman civilization and to Gaul.

They were even stronger than both Roman and Saminium and even predated the Samnites and Romans.

A typical Etruscan warrior

Similar in looks to the Babalonian spearmen.

______________________________________

That's as far as civilizations go, seen as though this fits in the time of 0.A.D.

This gives the Latin civs more depth.

I would also suggest that the Thracians be added as a separate civ. They were a great civ too and fought many battles with Greece, Rome, and the Gauls. Persians too.

The Romans need an auxilia unit

Afterall these units defended virtually all of Rome's borders.

The auxilia unit is a spearmen with an oval shield and wore lorica hamata (i.e. Chainmail)

They are a tough unit those these units in 0.A.D. need to be strong but very cheap.

______________________________________________________________________

Now the current Greek hoplite needs some more work done in my opinion.

The model picture looks no where near that of the unit you create.

The hoplite is distinctive in the looks, and the helmet normally had multi coloured crests, Sparta had red mainly.

The corinthinian helmet shown in the game doesn't look at all correct.

I was disapointed with this though...

It needs fine work to get that distinctive hoplite look

The front of the unit should look like this.

____________________________________________

Now for the AIs

We need an Ai that is a diplomatic one. The ability to make alliance and play like that.

To give that AoE feel and AI that taunts you as well and if you ignore it attacks you sort of thing.

The Ais need more life in them. But really a diplomatic AI would be awesome.

Edited March 2, 2013 by Burzum

[Not a Spartan]

Some of the helmets look pretty Corinthian to me.

Then again, I'm no Spartan…

As for the Samnites, there are a few Samnites units in Atlas, though any additional stuff would likely be on the back burner for now. I think they're trying to do Plotemiac Egypt next. Obviously I'd love more units though…

…and yes, more Etruscan representation would be nice. Just borrowed a little British Musuem pocket guidebook on them (I'm hardly big on history); maybe I can try typing a rough miniciv profile on them tomorrow?

[SMST]

Also note that the Auxila Units that you posted would be Imperial Roman. They will most likely be part of the Imperial Roman faction in 0 A.D. Part II (I am ready to bet a year full supply of chocolate that they will fill the role of Infantry Spearmen ).

Thracians, Samnites and Etruscans (and Scythians) would be nice additions indeed. Though we already have many civs more than were planned originally (first there were 6, now we are down to 10, I think), so go easy on the devs.

[oshron]

Thracians, Samnites and Etruscans (and Scythians) would be nice additions indeed. Though we already have many civs more than were planned originally (first there were 6, now we are down to 10, I think), so go easy on the devs.

1. Achaemenid Persians
   
2. Athenians
   
3. Brythonic Celts
   
4. Carthaginians
   
5. Gaulish Celts
   
6. Iberians
   
7. Macedonians
   
8. Mauryan Indians
   
9. Republican Romans
   
10. Spartans
    
11. and possibly the Ptolemaic Egyptians
    

since the Ptolemies seem to be upcoming, i would personally recommend the addition of one more civ for an even twelve (personally, my vote is for the Syracusans)

[Mythos_Ruler]

1. Achaemenid Persians
   
2. Athenians
   
3. Brythonic Celts
   
4. Carthaginians
   
5. Gaulish Celts
   
6. Iberians
   
7. Macedonians
   
8. Mauryan Indians
   
9. Republican Romans
   
10. Spartans
    
11. and possibly the Ptolemaic Egyptians
    

since the Ptolemies seem to be upcoming, i would personally recommend the addition of one more civ for an even twelve (personally, my vote is for the Syracusans)

Seleucids make the most sense, since they connect the rest of the Mediterranean world with Mauryan India.

[Not a Spartan]

Wouldn't having Seleucids and Achaemenid Persians together be a bit odd?

(I love new factions as much as the next player, just needed to note the strangeness)

Edited March 3, 2013 by Not a Spartan

[SMST]

Wouldn't having Seleucids and Achaemenid Persians together be a bit odd?

(I love new factions as much as the next player, just needed to note the strangeness)

0 A.D. is "a period in time that never was". Thus spoke the creators.

You could always say the old nobility of the Achaemenid empire revolted against Seleucid rule or something like that. If I recall correctly, this did actually happen at some point ...

[Mythos_Ruler]

Wouldn't having Seleucids and Achaemenid Persians together be a bit odd?

(I love new factions as much as the next player, just needed to note the strangeness)

0 A.D. is "a period in time that never was". Thus spoke the creators.

You could always say the old nobility of the Achaemenid empire revolted against Seleucid rule or something like that. If I recall correctly, this did actually happen at some point ...

Indeed. And 0 A.D. Part 2 will have Imperial Romans facing off against Republican Romans and Eastern (Byzantine) Romans and against Athenians and Spartans and Mauryan Indians, and Parthians vs. Achaemenid Persians, none of which makes absolute historical sense, but which gives greater range of opportunities for gameplay in single and multiplayer. If there are ever singleplayer campaigns, I don't see how more civs would hinder them, only expand the possibilities.

[Burzum]

0 A.D. is "a period in time that never was". Thus spoke the creators.

You could always say the old nobility of the Achaemenid empire revolted against Seleucid rule or something like that. If I recall correctly, this did actually happen at some point ...

Correct.

Although, they weren't "Achaemenid" in that sense, They were still persians without a Government. But there were uprisings and things happening.

I don't really see the point in creating a separate Persian civilization as the very term "Achaemenid" was a Latin abbreviation for "old Persian".

The Persians already have a civilization and in the time era of the game it was in the span of 500 BCE.

But however, I will agree that the Seleucids be added. They were a by-product of Alxeanders Empire.

So no this wouldn't make sense if it was added. Waste of time. We already have Persians.

Indeed. And 0 A.D. Part 2 will have Imperial Romans facing off against Republican Romans and Eastern (Byzantine) Romans and against Athenians and Spartans and Mauryan Indians, and Parthians vs. Achaemenid Persians, none of which makes absolute historical sense, but which gives greater range of opportunities for gameplay in single and multiplayer. If there are ever singleplayer campaigns, I don't see how more civs would hinder them, only expand the possibilities.

That's why I suggested more Latin tribes/civs. So we can have a face off of Samnites Vs. Romans Vs. Etruscans... Maybe Umbrians???

Personally the more civs we have in this game the better...

0 A.D. should not become stagnated with limitations.

AoE was great because it lots of civs...But too few units... and they didn't look correct :/

Empire Earth sucks because Civilizations? That's a laugh and unique units most of them were only available in the bloody map editor.

0 A.D. is nice because here we getting the best of both worlds... More civs and more units.

Edited March 3, 2013 by Burzum

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

By far, it would be better to introduce the Latins and Etruscans before the Seluecids.

[Mythos_Ruler]

By far, it would be better to introduce the Latins and Etruscans before the Seluecids.

Gonna disagree there. The Seleucids had an empire that spanned thousands of miles and brought Hellenism to the East. They had a highly developed and diverse army that fought against the Ptolemies, Macedonians, Romans, Gauls (Galatians), various Greeks, and Mauryans. They're a perfect faction to include after the Ptolemies.

[Burzum]

Hellenism was stamped into the middle eastern cultures when Alexander arrived.

The Seleucids were a short lived empire that ultimately got eaten up by the factions they ingested from the Macedonians.

I would say in terms of what culture gave more to the world... I would say the Etruscans.

The Etruscans also gave to Rome lots and I think many people fail to recognize that.

You cannot blame this lack of emphasis on the smaller Latin civs because they got swallowed up by Rome in that they totally consumed them into their own. Later though other external integrations destroyed various literature or anything that contained influence from these civilizations, deeming them evil and heathen.

In my honest opinion, more emphasis needs to be layed on the Latin tribes.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Hellenism was stamped into the middle eastern cultures when Alexander arrived.

The Seleucids were a short lived empire that ultimately got eaten up by the factions they ingested from the Macedonians.

I would say in terms of what culture gave more to the world... I would say the Etruscans.

The Etruscans also gave to Rome lots and I think many people fail to recognize that.

You cannot blame this lack of emphasis on the smaller Latin civs because they got swallowed up by Rome in that they totally consumed them into their own. Later though other external integrations destroyed various literature or anything that contained influence from these civilizations, deeming them evil and heathen.

In my honest opinion, more emphasis needs to be layed on the Latin tribes.

The Seleucid Empire lasted 250 years (30 years longer than the Persian Empire), while Alexander's lasted less than a decade. It was the Seleucids who truly brought Hellenism to the East. It was the Seleucids who participated in the epic battles at Raphia and Magnesia, using massive war elephants and huge 40,000-member armies. I'm not saying the Samnites and Etruscans are not important, but they just don't have the massive international reach that the Seleucids had. The Seleucids bring a grand scale that the Etruscans and Samnites do not.

Yes, they influenced Rome, I'll give them that, but are they more important than the Seleucids who had an empire of tens of millions of people and who fought against half a dozen of the factions currently in the game (Mauryans, Romans, Gauls, Greeks, Macedonians) or being planned (Ptolemies, Parthians)? I'm not saying the Etruscans and/or Samnites couldn't or shouldn't be added, but the Seleucids make more sense for an empire-building game like 0 A.D.

To be honest, in addition to the Seleucids, I'd love the game to also have Etruscans, Samnites, Thebans, Syracusans, Thracians, Pontus, Armenians, and Illyrians, and then split the Iberians into the Lusitanians and Celt-Iberii.

Edited March 3, 2013 by Mythos_Ruler
Clarity and Additional comments

[Burzum]

The Seleucid Empire lasted 150 years, while Alexander's lasted less than a decade. It was the Seleucids who truly brought Hellenism to the East. It was the Seleucids who participated in the epic battles at Raphia and Magnesia, using massive war elephants and huge 40,000-member armies. I'm not saying the Samnites and Etruscans are not important, but they just don't have the massive international reach that the Seleucids had. The Seleucids bring a grand scale that the Etruscans and Samnites do not.

Yes, they influenced Rome, I'll give them that, but are they more important than the Seleucids who had an empire of tens of millions of people and who fought against half a dozen of the factions currently in the game (Mauryans, Romans, Gauls, Greeks, Macedonians) or being planned (Ptolemies, Parthians)? I'm not saying the Etruscans and/or Samnites couldn't or shouldn't be added, but the Seleucids make more sense for an empire-building game like 0 A.D.

To be honest, in addition to the Seleucids, I'd love the game to also have Etruscans, Samnites, Thebans, and Illyrians, and then split the Iberians into the Lusitanians and Celt-Iberii.

My statement about the Seleucids was not implied that I wasn't in support of them being added. Regardless of which civilization gets added first is irrelevant, Etruscans, Samnites or Seleucids. Infact I also want to see the Seleucids in the game. But the levels of importance on one faction over the other is relative. What would Rome be without the Etruscans or what would the people in the Seleucid empire be without them? If I had to pick the most important one... Honestly I would choose the Etruscans. Why? Because had they not been there, we would see a total different image that Rome had. We would see a totally different language as evident of the fact that Latin was very much influenced by the Etruscans and their art and culture which lead down the verge of saying would Rome of achieved an Empire for the long period it had without that influence? That said, the Seleucids on the other hand, wouldn't of been that important. Greece would of still remained dominantly Hellenistic and much of the middle east would be Persian? So it's what significance or importance are we looking at here?

[Sighvatr]

I thought Romans are Etruscans? Where were the Etruscans while Rome was created?

[Not a Spartan]

Rome was part of the Etruscans during its kingdom phase- Rome only became a republic in 509 BC after overthrowing their Etruscan king, Tarquinus Superbus.

In stages, they later assimilated the Etruscans, who kept their culture and influenced Rome for several more centuries.

Anyway, I've spent my evening trying to put something together for the Etruscans! Progress so far.

[Greek_Basileus]

Yeah; the Etruscans would be interesting; (they were an Italic/ Lydian people from Asia Minor)

They were influenced by the Greeks; later influencing early Rome.

[Burzum]

Yeah; the Etruscans would be interesting; (they were an Italic/ Lydian people from Asia Minor)

They were influenced by the Greeks; later influencing early Rome.

The early Etruscans were Phoenicians that settled in Umbria north east Italy.

They brought a lot of Hellenistic influence with them, but they weren't as Greek as more southern tribes of Italy.

Edited March 5, 2013 by Burzum

[SMST]

The early Etruscans were Phoenicians that settled in Umbria north east Italy.

Where did you read that? The origin of the Etruscans is a mystery, actually, because of their language, which resembles nothing spoken in Europe or the Middle East (Indo-European or Semitic, mainly). There have been attempts to link them to Minoans and Basque people, because they too spoke/speak a language that was/is not related to anything, but these attempts were not fruitful.

Also the Etruscans did not settle in Umbria, they lived, believe it or not, in Etruria.

They brought a lot of Hellenistic influence with them, but they weren't as Greek as more southern tribes of Italy.

My understanding is that they were hellenized when they were already in Italy, not before. I might be wrong, though.

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

Correct, the Etruscans were hellenized while they urbanized themselves. It was first the Euboeans I believe, followed by the Corinthians, and finally the Athenians who conducted trade with them, lending a lot of the Hellenic culture to the Etruscans.

[Not a Spartan]

Oh Claudius! If only those volumes had survived...

Updated my little document today to add Samnite and Ligurian mercenary units. If we ever get around to non-Rome Latin civs perhaps all of them would share an embassy type building with common Samnite/Etruscan/etc. units?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vLEmFxBv5zntacp8YP2q7CKI4XIKW3HBnT-PZuyFUpk/edit?usp=sharing

[Burzum]

Where did you read that? The origin of the Etruscans is a mystery, actually, because of their language, which resembles nothing spoken in Europe or the Middle East (Indo-European or Semitic, mainly). There have been attempts to link them to Minoans and Basque people, because they too spoke/speak a language that was/is not related to anything, but these attempts were not fruitful.

Also the Etruscans did not settle in Umbria, they lived, believe it or not, in Etruria.

My understanding is that they were hellenized when they were already in Italy, not before. I might be wrong, though.

Yeah, it's a mystery. And what we know of the Etruscans is very vivid. But a consensus amongst modern historians share the common opinions of old historians Herodotus and have to believe that the Estruscans were once Phoenicians.

This is because there is a lot of Phoenician culture and influence imbued in Etruscan art and the rivalry they had with them tells another story.

I believe they were Phoenicians, but it's impossible to assert this as factual because today, we don't have anything to prove this. So anything that is pretty much been said about them is only based on speculation.

Correct, the Etruscans were hellenized while they urbanized themselves. It was first the Euboeans I believe, followed by the Corinthians, and finally the Athenians who conducted trade with them, lending a lot of the Hellenic culture to the Etruscans.

They appeared to have also brought Hellenistic culture with them when they arrived in Italy. But they still traded and there is evidence that had been taught by the Greeks. The Greeks even write about this.

Oh Claudius! If only those volumes had survived...

LOL ....

Classic!

And that document you written is nice dude. Quite informative.

[Not a Spartan]

Thanks! I'm really learning as I go along- I'm still very new to the Etruscans, and ancient history in general.

Anyway, I decided to continue a bit tonight with some sketching:

The Etruscans, if they do appear in game and are anything like my interpretation of them, might be the only users of the old mono-oar pentekoter, which I'm trying to distinguish by adding a above-waterline ram (mostly cosmetic) and a crow's nest, giving it the vision range of a somewhat larger ship. Overall, it'll be cheap and fast- a scouting ship that's hopefully reasonably historically accurate.

edit: excuse the images, I don't have a scanner handy now

Edited March 7, 2013 by Not a Spartan

[Burzum]

That looks very good.

Interesting to see how these will look in 3D.

The Etruscans have a unique distinctive sort of civilization. One that really does mimic that of the old Babylonians, that is the style of armour etc etc.

Hmm.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Now we take the task to try to doing possible.