Seven Kingdoms: Ancient Adversaries

[Unarmed]

I feel the need to tell more about this unknown and perhaps underrated game. Which is free for download at the moment.

Gamespot gave it a 9 out of 10, and the users rated it 8.4 . There's no metacritic for this game otherwise I would have told that.

Note: don't let the not-so-impressive graphics scare you.

I would really like the developers to take a look at this game because I think it would be great inspiration for 0 A.D.

Let me tell a little story what makes this game so great (bear in mind I haven't played in a while):

So I start a game with the highest number of kingdoms (AI), I think it was 7. In the game the resource is different as 0 A.D (something I wouldn't want in 0 A.D also). There are a few visible rocks (I picked 4) on the map, which reappear randomly on the map after depleted. There are different types, you have copper, clay and iron. Settlements will pay you for different types, if you only have one and a lot of it, it will not make much money. You simply build a mine on top of the piece of rock and you gather it (though you need people inside it and so a village nearby) and you make a factory to process it and a market where it goes to get sold. This type of resource is not a main resource, you just need it to gain money by building markets near settlements or trade with other kingdoms. I'm only going to explain this little bit about this subject, if you want to know more play the game it's free.

Ok so most of the time I manage to get first to such a rock and I gain money. Money is needed for generals, spies and buildings, I'm not sure if soldiers also cost money. Most of the time I end up being one of the strongest military and economic powers, now comes the fun part:

You would think being the strongest military power and economic power means I can streamroll the other kingdoms and win. Well it is possible, but in Seven Kingdoms you have a reputation system, waging war and killing innocent civilians means losing reputation, the more reputation you lose the less loyal your troops become and they might deflect to other kingdoms and you have the change that your settlements begin to rebel (another feature I wouldn't want in 0 A.D).

So what I do is the following instead: Seven Kingdoms shows all sorts of statistics, some I would like in the diplomacy screen of 0 A.D;

-who is allied with who

-who is at war with who

-who has the biggest economy, the most soldiers, the biggest reputation (economy would be nice in 0 A.D, but it should possible be only for friendlies)

So I look which one is my biggest competion, the number 1 or the number 2. Than I look at his enemies and at the underdogs. What I than do is giving his enemies, or underdogs as much money as I can so the kingdoms weaken eachother and I'm sitting in my base relaxing.

Most of the time I give underdogs lots of support (I always wished I could give units to them, I see this is planned in 0 A.D, please do this!). Even so, most of the time they die off anyway, they get bankrupt or they are crushed.

Though it does pay off sometimes and I gain supremacy in a very fun way (I steamroll my enemies when they are all weak).

What's funny, sometimes a underdog that I gave a lot of money, and I sometimes fight with them and agree to declare war to their enemies, ends up becoming so strong that my evil plan stabs me in the back.

This winning through diplomacy might not appeal to all, and it was sort of forced by the reputation system that made waging war costly, however I would like to be able to do this in 0 A.D without being forced to.

The 0 A.D design document says this:

Comparison

If you were to compare our game to other games, how would it stack up? What would be familiar? Here is a rundown of commonalities with other games.

• Age of Empires - Historical era
  
• Age of Kings - Basic combat system
  
• Rise of Nations - Territories
  
• Generals - Ranks
  
• Warcraft III - Heroes
  
• Praetorians - Units in trees
  
• Knights of Honor - Units on structures
  
• Civilization - Technology 'tree'
  

If it is up to me it would become like this:

A Comparison

If you were to compare our game to other games, how would it stack up? What would be familiar? Here is a rundown of commonalities with other games.

• Age of Empires - Historical era
  
• Age of Kings - Basic combat system
  
• Rise of Nations - Territories
  
• Generals - Ranks
  
• Warcraft III - Heroes
  
• Praetorians - Units in trees
  
• Knights of Honor - Units on structures
  
• Civilization - Technology 'tree'
  
• Seven Kingdoms - Diplomacy
  

See also, post #39, from this thread:

http://www.wildfireg...=20#entry270730

Here I explain some more about the diplomacy, and how the AI diplomacy behaved in Seven Kingdoms. More about Seven Kingdoms:

-spies were interesting, you could kill enemy generals, steal structures, bribe soldiers, steal information (I see the developers want something similar)

-combat was nothing interesting, other games were superior in this, though it did have units leveling up and generals were interesting - you needed them for morale and to let your units level up in barracks. Units could level up by being in a barracks with a general or through combat. I think they should have made it so that there was a limit when being in a barracks and that the remaining experience should be gained while fighting (you could have very strong soldiers by doing nothing)

There was also a sequel, Seven Kingdoms 2: the Frythan wars, which is rated one point higher as the original game. I have only played the demo but, it has:

-Age of Empires style graphics

-Age of Empires style units (in the original you had citizen soldiers basicly and no cavalry and stuff like that)

-I think you could do false flag operations but I'm not sure it was not in the demo, but it sounds awesome

There is also Seven Kingdoms: conquest, which is a disgrace to the series. It is rated a 2.0 on Gamespot and other sites. It turned Seven Kingdoms in a generic real time strategy without anything interesting. I feel sorry for the people that made it but if I read the reviews it must be horrible. They took away all the features of Seven Kingdoms, the name being the only thing familiar.

Do not buy this.

So I hope the developers take a look at this game Seven Kingdoms which is free, or perhaps Seven Kingdoms 2, because I think the diplomacy is something that is really lacking right now, and has much more potential. I could understand that some people don't want to have diplomacy in competitive games, but since you can lock teams this should not be a problem.

Edited June 26, 2013 by Unarmed

[Lion.Kanzen]

I play ancient kingdoms but I don't remember the version. If this version are most newer I test some demo and find gameplay review in YouTube.

Nice for sharing with us.

Edit2: no I was play Seven Kingdom Conquest.

I'll try to prepare something similar with some games.

praetorians.

Empire earth 2

Age of Empires 3

spartan ancient wars.

rise of Nations

Warcraft 3

Starcraft 2

Edited June 26, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Unarmed]

When you first play it it might seem a bit boring, I played it yesterday again and in the beginning it can seem rather boring, even to me. But it is a good game.

Maybe someone wonders what is stopping me from playing this way, let me explain:

In Singleplayer:

-you start as enemies instead of neutral, AI is not diplomatic at all, they do not ask for resources, ask to trade, ask to become friendly etc.

-market can be used effectively without actual trading

-resources are nearby and not placed randomly so you do not really need to trade because you have all the resources

In multiplayer you could have players asking for resources and players asking for alliances. But the last two points apply to multiplayer.

Some of these things I mentioned, when changed, might not be good for competitive players. I would like starting neutral to be default when there are no teams, but when locked teams is checked everyone should be enemies. The resources is not a big problem. I can make maps myself where resources are placed differently.

The market I'm not sure about. I will ask on the idea and suggestion forum what people think about it.

praetorians.

Empire earth 2

Age of Empires 3

spartan ancient wars.

rise of Nations

Warcraft 3

Starcraft 2

I have never heard of praetorians, but I see the developers have played this. What I like about Age of Empires 3 is the treasure guardians, the natives and the trading routes (though in case of trading routes, I wouldn't want it to be the only way to trade), and I would like them in 0 A.D. The treasure guardians if implemented should not be on competive maps or modes.

I played Empire Earth 1 only. I don't think it had any features that would be nice for 0 A.D. I guess you know for Empire Earth 2.

I heard Spartan Ancient Wars was nothing special, though maybe it had some cool features or systems you know of. I heard it had Greek belly bows, Gastraphetes, which is kind of cool. (not sure though)

Rise of nations I played the demo. I thought it was nice, but I can't remember what features it had. It had something cool.

The Blizzard games I'm not fond of, but I haven't even played it. I saw Warcraft and Starcraft played on Korea TV and it seems boring to me. I also watched some Starcraft 2 videos which I also find boring to watch (I don't have Dawn of War 2, but I enjoy watching those matches). I don't want to bash any of the people who like it, and I should try it before making assumptions, but it does not appeal to me. I bet it has some nice features though, it is popular for a reason.

Edited June 27, 2013 by Unarmed

[Lion.Kanzen]

See the Video

we talk more deep Warcraft is not great RTS for me. but have good things in Ai and some funny things. and Starcraft i like Abilities.

First you see they only can construct with a kind of outpost .

That my the idea to have a village to train mercenaries.

Next probably idea is the units have less range of sight into a Forest, that useful to ambush.(very like to Total war)

And you don't train the siege weapons, in this game you construct the siege in the battle field, and you can abandon them even enemy can your siege weapons and use against you.

Edited June 27, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Unarmed]

See the Video

we talk more deep Warcraft is not great RTS for me. but have good things in Ai and some funny things. and Starcraft i like Abilities.

First you see they only can construct with a kind of outpost .

That my the idea to have a village to train mercenaries.

Next probably idea is the units have less range of sight into a Forest, that useful to ambush.(very like to Total war)

And you don't train the siege weapons, in this game you construct the siege in the battle field, and you can abandon them even enemy can your siege weapons and use against you.

Cool, will check out the video.

One important reason that I make a thread for Seven Kingdoms is that it is not well-known and unique. If you or anybody else know games not well-known feel free to share. Lords of the Realms 2 is another game I'm sure not many know. It was sort of Medieval total war: 0.5.

But it does not have any features I think would be fitting for 0 A.D. Same with the Settlers clone Knights and Merchants.

[chaosislife]

It's not news to me, AA was the predecessor to the greatest game of all time, Seven Kingdoms 2. There's also that buggy abomination seven kingdoms conquest, which is only a successor in name, kinda like the final fantasy "series". AA is pretty fun, but kinda buggy as it was designed for dos I believe.

Edit: Actually, having read more of your post I noticed that you didn't know that this game was in fact open source now. Here's the link : http://www.7kfans.co...ex.php/Download

Edited June 27, 2013 by chaosislife

[Unarmed]

It's not news to me, AA was the predecessor to the greatest game of all time, Seven Kingdoms 2. There's also that buggy abomination seven kingdoms conquest, which is only a successor in name, kinda like the final fantasy "series". AA is pretty fun, but kinda buggy as it was designed for dos I believe.

I could play AA fine on Windows XP without bugs. But on my new Windows 7 it did not seem to work.

I haven't played the sequel but it had good ratings so I suppose it is like AA but improved for it's time.

Conquest is indeed a successor only in name, so I've heard. Haven't played it.

I bet there are many more real time strategies not well-known, with great features or potential great features. Which we can use as inspiration for 0 A.D.

By the way, preatorians, I recognised the cover art, I think I have seen this game in a RTS top/chart.

[Lion.Kanzen]

praetorians was something like Total war game, but not too realistic. The units can toggle between run and walk and that consumes stamina.

Romans can form testudo and thrown pillum.

[Unarmed]

praetorians was something like Total war game, but not too realistic. The units can toggle between run and walk and that consumes stamina.

Romans can form testudo and thrown pillum.

I don't care that much about realism in 0 A.D. Except for buildings being destroyed by swords and arrows, I really prefer the Age of Empires 3 way with units throwing torches.

Historical accurate I do care about more, which I guess is realism though. This applies to units but also flora and fauna. This makes the game authentic.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Me neigther, but if do the gameplay more easy. Example walk and run toggle feature. Or archer with incendiary arrows.

[Unarmed]

Me neigther, but if do the gameplay more easy. Example walk and run toggle feature. Or archer with incendiary arrows.

Walk and run toggle I would really like. Incendiary arrows too.

Though I must say, somethings I would like more realistic. I had another example but I can't think of it.

I know one though, but this is also historical accuracy. For incendiary arrows I would like them to be used like they were used in history. I think they were mainly used to fire over pallisade walls and set fire to wooden houses* (wooden houses without walls can be torched). Also for destroying siege engines I thought. I don't think they were used against infantry. But, it is not a big issue if incendiary arrows would be used against infantry.

*Would be cool to have somekind of "barrage" ability or better said attack ground ability, so archers can actually fire over pallisade walls to destroy houses.

Edited June 28, 2013 by Unarmed

[Lion.Kanzen]

Can use a cavalry with ropes to destroy buildings that are damaged. But one thing I worried about this idea, the fire animation can slow the performance gaming.

[Unarmed]

Can use a cavalry with ropes to destroy buildings that are damaged. But one thing I worried about this idea, the fire animation can slow the performance gaming.

That's a fair issue.

But Iberians already have flaming javelins.

[Lion.Kanzen]

That is true, we can ask to Art department if is easy to implement.

[Unarmed]

That is true, we can ask to Art department if is easy to implement.

It isn't really high priority. (the population for scenarios we talked about is)

But yeah, it is a good thing to ask. What I think:

-fire is already available

-animation could be available (javelin animation could be used)

-secondary attacks are not yet available I think, and even if they are, can a secondary attack work for only one type? (torches would be for buildings and siege engines)

-stick needs to be made but seems easy

[Lion.Kanzen]

That other matter secondary attack is suppose to be for alpha14to start to implement that.

a buch of Games are reference to do that.

Age of Empires 3

praetorians

Starcraft 2

total War series. And may be Age of Mythology.

Edited June 29, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Unarmed]

That other matter secondary attack is suppose to be for alpha14to start to implement that.

a buch of Games are reference to do that.

Age of Empires 3

praetorians

Starcraft 2

total War series. And may be Age of Mythology.

Even Seven Kingdoms had secondary attack. But you could not choose really. Units that could also do melee would only do that when someone was attacking them in melee.

[chaosislife]

We don't already have secondary attack? My chaos units are capable of both ranged and melee.......but I do get errors on melee, prolly cuz the units themselves are archers and don't have knives to stab with....