Animals raiding farms?

[Unarmed]

While I have the best memories playing Age of Empires and Empire Earth, my favorite classic/old rts has to be Seven Kingdoms: Ancient Adversaries. The team should look at the diplomatic system and diplomatic AI for inspiration, it is great (the combat was nothing special, spies was also interesting). I have the disk version but this game is free now by the way. Check it out!

One thing that was quite cool was the Frythans, monsters that would attack your base. Obviously I don't want monsters in the game. So instead of monsters attacking your base, how about animals attacking your farms (raiding them)?

Kind of like this, another inspiration for the idea:

Note: those are Gelada, unlikely we will have them in 0 A.D, they are family of true baboons but not baboons. They only live in the Euthiopian highlands, not anywhere else in Africa.

I'm wondering, since this is really a gimmick and I'm unsure if it would make gameplay interesting (Could be kind of challenging early game I guess), if someone likes the idea.

All kind of animals "raid" crops, rabbits, wild boar even deer. Many more. I would think back in the days of Rome, raiding by animals might have been worse without having guns.

Most animals however would "raid" farms when humans are not near them unlike the ballsy Gelada.

But that doesn't matter in the game.

Could this be interesting or is it too much of a useless gimmick?

[sanderd17]

This is a suggestion I hadn't heard before, and it looks interesting on first sight.

Although, as there will be infinite farms, it will be a bit hard to make it realistic (you can't graze already collected food). So you would need to have animals stealing food. Like a bear hanging around your farmstead to take food. It would be nice for map designers anyway.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Hahaha a handicap in the map. Very funny to thinking in about regular play. Is very nice but see what say other. I love map handicaps.

[Unarmed]

This is a suggestion I hadn't heard before, and it looks interesting on first sight.

Although, as there will be infinite farms, it will be a bit hard to make it realistic (you can't graze already collected food). So you would need to have animals stealing food. Like a bear hanging around your farmstead to take food. It would be nice for map designers anyway.

The bear idea is great! I can imagine the look on the face of a new player when a bear steals its food.

For your idea, bears are good, in India maps there could be the Rhesus Macaques (monkeys) stealing and Middle Eastern maps Hamadras baboons or generic baboons, Africa obviously baboons generic or otherwise. North-Africa could be bears (in Atlas mountain area) or the Rhesus Macaques as indefinite placeholders for Barbary macaques. I'm giving examples what species should do this, I saw these species on the list (generic baboons and Rhesus Macaques) but they aren't done yet.

I also got the idea from the wild boar issue here in the Netherlands. The biggest issue people have with wild boars is them destroying farmlands (and gardens) with rooting. Otherwise they would be everywhere just like small deer (roedeer) here, though traffic is also an issue.

When I wrote this idea I also got the idea of bandits. Now that I've read your idea I got a better idea. This could be something for specific scenarios not something for random maps I think. Just some generic campsite building and some generic bandits that instead of stealing from your farmstead steal from your mill. But this requires additional textures and models, which you don't have with animals.

Another idea that right now comes to my head is locusts. But that's a bit too random event (I thought of reading something that this was a big no-no) like and you can't do anything about it. In short: I do not like the idea of insect plagues.

The bear-farmstead idea is truelly genius. Though I also still like my idea of destroying farms.

The bear would also be pretty funny. Imagine an army of bears near your farmstead.

EDIT: just some videos to show the species that raid buildings:

Baboons (they are a problem in South African cities)

Rhesus Macaques (India has monkey catchers for a reason)

This shows how much a bear can do to get to his food:

I'm not sure if Barbary macaques raid buildings. Baboons and Rhesus I know they do for sure.

I must say at first I wasn't sure about this idea, but I like it more and more!

Edited June 24, 2013 by Unarmed

[alpha123]

As a fairly competetive player, I would find this extremely annoying. It adds an extra element of randomness to what should be a deterministic clash of skill and strategy, and adds another thing to worry about which doesn't really add any new skill and which distracts from what the game should be about: building the biggest army possible and using it in the smartest way possible.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Is like a earthquake or a flood, a random disaster, can be funny for people can like with medium easy bot and have all elements against them.

[jca2013]

Sounds like a good idea to me! That would make the game more interesting and challenging. It could also slow down the players on the other side as well. Depending on how the map is set up and if one or both sides are effected by the animals. hehe

[Unarmed]

As a fairly competetive player, I would find this extremely annoying. It adds an extra element of randomness to what should be a deterministic clash of skill and strategy, and adds another thing to worry about which doesn't really add any new skill and which distracts from what the game should be about: building the biggest army possible and using it in the smartest way possible.

Can you be more specific? Which idea do you not like? The normal animals raiding farms or the bear and monkeys raiding farmsheats?

If you mean the normal animals, I think you have a fair point. Since these would be numerous (though there are ways to limit it, only some species would do it). But this is a good argument against that.

The bear idea however I see no issues. It's effect would be similar to the dangerous animals that attack your troops. Or do you think dangerous animals are also distracting and extremely annoying? The farm raiding would be limited to some specific species: bears which could take the most food, and monkeys which would take little food but would come in gangs, but are easy to kill. I would think these animals would not be numerous, at least the bear. This idea is just as random as dangerous animals attack. In my opinion not very random since you would know which species raid.

See things like the locusts or earthquake are really random, and this would definatly interfere with gameplay, hence I do not like it. I just brought it up. (Other issues with this is; you can't stop it from happening, you can't defend against etc.)

I can understand your concern. And it's good to not all agree. Though I do feel like it would be less of an issue than you make it to be, in the case of the bear idea, the farm raiding and locusts (the locusts which I did not like by the way) yes those have the potential to be really annoying.

Also, in case of the bear, which I now favor over my original idea, because you make a good point, it would only really be early game.

Another true issue could be that you do not see the bear or monkeys stealing, and you are seriously being drained from food.

That would certainly be annoying. But right now the same can happen with regular armies. If you get some kind of warning when your farmsheat is being raided I see little issue.

Another thing:

Why yes?

Well first it was just a gimmick idea. But now I think it could be interesting early game.

Also, it could be implemented like this:

-bear raiding

-bear non raiding

However, the issue I see with that is it becoming confusing. The idea is that the raiding bears would be for scenarios and the non raiding bear for multiplayer.

The raiding bear could also be from a building of some sort, and this building together with the raiding bears would only be on scenarios (or other special maps).

Edited June 24, 2013 by Unarmed

[sanderd17]

At alpha123, when you're doing competition, shouldn't you just take a map that has at least random as possible? Also no dangerous animals.

If there is only a limited number of animals that can "attack" your food resources, you can surely find a map without bears. It could be fun for casual players I think.

[Unarmed]

At alpha123, when you're doing competition, shouldn't you just take a map that has at least random as possible? Also no dangerous animals.

If there is only a limited number of animals that can "attack" your food resources, you can surely find a map without bears. It could be fun for casual players I think.

Note that we are talking about Sanderds bear idea, I have sort of abondoned my original idea.

I agree. And I think it could be interesting early game for less casual players too; a extra challenge.

I can understant his view though. And I have only played against AI, in which the early game is kind of challenging as you need to manage more, but otherwise you don't have to worry about forces attacking you. I have no idea if most players rush in multiplayer. Rushing + animals raiding could be a bit too much perhaps.

The special building I think is a good solution to this. It could be very Age of Empires 3 like or like the game I mentioned: Seven Kingdoms.

In Seven Kingdoms the monster lairs would give you gold when you destroyed it (and the monsters themselves). In Age of Empires 3 (I only played the demos) I think you had all sorts of animals and humans that would give you gold or food.

So there would be a building, requires extra work though, (cave for bears, macaques could perhaps be given a ruined temple, baboons several trees together) in which there are raiding animals. They raid your farmshet. The animals could respawn or not respawn. The purpose of the building is making them only available on certain maps and making it easier to distinguish.

The building, better said lair, could give food when destroyed. I must say I enjoyed those kind of things in the Age of Empires 3 demos. Though those type of things should only be on specific scenarios (like the treasures). In Seven Kingdoms it was a strategy of instead going for (read attacking) enemy factions to go for monster lairs as these would give you gold when destroyed.

I really want to know from you alpha123, with all these alternatives and solutions Sanderd and I give, do you think it is still an issue? Basically would you prefer:

-raiding bears (and monkeys when they are made) to be only on specific maps made for singleplayer/casual play

-raiding bears in multiplayer matches similar as dangerous animals

-or no raiding bears at all?

I think if implemented it has the potential to be something quirky (read unconventional) in a good way. Reasons:

-extra challenge early game

-something unique

-atmospheric

I think it's a bit unfair to quickly say no to this idea, when there are options to solve issues that it could potentially have.

If the options are non-existant, or the idea itself does not add anything to gameplay then yes.

Obviously, it isn't just the idea itself that could be a problem, implementing it takes manpower and time, that could be used for more important things or for non 0 A.D related stuff. I'm no programmer but it seems not that hard to make a bear steal food from a farmshet. Monkeys raiding in groups seem harder and making specific buildings costs more time.

[zoot]

Seems like something that might be done on a map-by-map basis with triggers. I wouldn't want it for standard play.

[Unarmed]

Seems like something that might be done on a map-by-map basis with triggers. I wouldn't want it for standard play.

I assume none of the ideas. Fair enough.

[sanderd17]

Now, if someone could implement triggers,

[Lion.Kanzen]

I don't know but after Performance theme, the triggers can be to put focus from Programming team.

[alpha123]

Can you be more specific? Which idea do you not like? The normal animals raiding farms or the bear and monkeys raiding farmsheats?

Neither, although the former is probably worse.

The bear idea however I see no issues. It's effect would be similar to the dangerous animals that attack your troops. Or do you think dangerous animals are also distracting and extremely annoying?

Yes, especially when there are more in one player's territory than another.

The farm raiding would be limited to some specific species: bears which could take the most food, and monkeys which would take little food but would come in gangs, but are easy to kill. I would think these animals would not be numerous, at least the bear. This idea is just as random as dangerous animals attack. In my opinion not very random since you would know which species raid.\

Do you know when they will raid? Do you know that they will raid all players equally?

If you get some kind of warning when your farmsheat is being raided I see little issue.

One of my problems with the idea is that something outside your or the other player's choices is influencing the outcome of the game.

However, the issue I see with that is it becoming confusing. The idea is that the raiding bears would be for scenarios and the non raiding bear for multiplayer.

That would be fine with me.

At alpha123, when you're doing competition, shouldn't you just take a map that has at least random as possible? Also no dangerous animals.

If we had such maps that would be great. Some multiplayer-optimized, symmetrical maps would be fantastic. I'm a pretty bad map designer though, plus the idea would have to wait for skirmish maps to be implemented anyway.

I have no idea if most players rush in multiplayer. Rushing + animals raiding could be a bit too much perhaps.

Not any more, although there was a time when it was popular when most players went for a female-heavy opening. I agree that animal raids would give an unfair advantage to the rusher.

The special building I think is a good solution to this. It could be very Age of Empires 3 like or like the game I mentioned: Seven Kingdoms.

In Seven Kingdoms the monster lairs would give you gold when you destroyed it (and the monsters themselves). In Age of Empires 3 (I only played the demos) I think you had all sorts of animals and humans that would give you gold or food.

I sort of like that idea, actually. I think it might work well for some scenarios, but not for general multiplayer; perhaps for some special multiplayer maps.

.

I really want to know from you alpha123, with all these alternatives and solutions Sanderd and I give, do you think it is still an issue? Basically would you prefer:

-raiding bears (and monkeys when they are made) to be only on specific maps made for singleplayer/casual play

-raiding bears in multiplayer matches similar as dangerous animals

-or no raiding bears at all?

I would prefer no raiding bears at all, although raiding only for single player would be OK.

I think if implemented it has the potential to be something quirky (read unconventional) in a good way. Reasons:

-extra challenge early game

-something unique

-atmospheric

That's true, it would distinguish us in an unconventional way. But I'm not really sure that it's a good thing.

Obviously, it isn't just the idea itself that could be a problem, implementing it takes manpower and time, that could be used for more important things or for non 0 A.D related stuff. I'm no programmer but it seems not that hard to make a bear steal food from a farmshet.

Do you mean that a bear would come by, attack a farmstead, and you'd have food subtracted from your resources? I don't think that's particularly difficult, although it's not trivial either.

Seems like something that might be done on a map-by-map basis with triggers. I wouldn't want it for standard play.

+1000

[Unarmed]

Thank you for being more specific. I appreciate it. I'm not a developer but I think it's important to make the game appeal to as many types of players as possible.

Maybe their could even be a mode of some sorts that removes all those random things and one that has these sort of things.

Or perhaps it would be better to be map related.

In Seven Kingdoms you had several options for a game. Again I can recommed it to try it out since it is free. From my memory without obvious ones like number of players:

-frythans (the monsters) on/off

-frythans aggressive or defensive

-victory condition

-resources nearby

-numbers of resources

-Ai aggresive passive etc.

-emergent factions on/off

Some of these things would be really nice to have in 0 A.D .

Resources nearby. Someone suggested having rescources not near your settlement. I would like this, but I feel this might make the game too difficult for new/casual players. A option would solve this.

Raiding and attacking animals. Instead of monster options there could be the animal options:

-aggressive on/off (meaning both raiding and attacking or those could be seperate)

Passive and aggressive AI

I guess this is not needed as you can just put AI to easy.

Perhaps they could be under options (where population is)? But yeah someone would need to implement this and it sounds much easier than it would be.

I think I'm going to play a round of Seven Kingdoms... To see how it was again.

EDIT: too many customizable options are also problematic though.

Though there could be default modes with specific options so nobody gets confused.

Edited June 25, 2013 by Unarmed

[frenchiveruti]

Ok, without writing a bible, i want to say:

Animals raiding idea: Good

Balance caused by random: bad, you can get 3 raids of bears and the other player only 1, and you will be in disadvantage.

What i think: It could be implemented as an OPTIONAL setting for multiplayer games, also, it could be like LOTR II battle for middle earth, that you have the little "lairs" of the monsters, and you get your troops there for destroying them.

Edited June 25, 2013 by frenchiveruti

[God]

I think it would only annoy people tbh.

Raids should be caused by the opponents.

If you're planning on developping a strategy game, it is necessary to keep 'the luck of random' as low as possible imo.

[alpha123]

I think it would only annoy people tbh.

Raids should be caused by the opponents.

If you're planning on developping a strategy game, it is necessary to keep 'the luck of random' as low as possible imo.

This summarizes my thoughts pretty well.

That's not to say it doesn't have a place in an (eventual) campaign though, but it should be done with triggers and be map specific as opposed to actually being implemented in the game itself.

[Unarmed]

It seems like it is agreed that, if it would ever be implemented, it would need to be optional. There are people who like it and people who don't. It seems much easier to let scenario makers decide if they want it.

On the other hand, if you do not like it, it seems very annoying if you happen to pick a map that happens to have something you don't want. So in that way a option, which is much more work I think though, seems better.

Whatever it would be, if it were ever implemented, a option to have aggressive animals on/off seems like a good idea for (very) competive players. Though I have no idea how much work that is.

[jca2013]

I don't see why it would have to be based on triggers. You can always set a specific path point for animals to travel to and from and what to do. It could also be random for them as well.

[Loki1950]

I don't see why it would have to be based on triggers. You can always set a specific path point for animals to travel to and from and what to do. It could also be random for them as well.

The problem with that is that their is no way to do that ATM either.

Enjoy the Choice