Suggestions for 0 A.D.

[Bakayaro]

I'll have to make comments on this...

1)They should also be damageable in-game. In-game, you should be able to build either kind over water, but they should be weak, expensive,and take a while to build, to offset the inherent tactical advantage. Maybe certain civs could have bridge-building advantages.

That makes defense too easy, especially on island maps. Block off ships with bridges and block off bridges by razing them?

5) Additional unit groups hotkeys. Maybe you push keys 1+2, 1+3, 1+4, 1+5, etc., all of the way up to 9+0. That would be an incredible 90 unit groups possible!

10 groups is enough too many groups mucks up micro and those extra key pushes are impossibly hard to pull off. The current grouping capabilities are good enough. I don't ever use more than 5 groups in my games, and I consider myself good at micro.

10) Units automatically attack the units they counter, eg. archers attack infantry, cavalry attack archers, infantry attack cavalry. If there weren't any units of the kind they counter, they would attack their own kind(archers would attack other archers, etc.) Only as a last resort would they attack the units that counter them.

This does micro for the player, which destroys gameplay. I don't like this.

18) Meteors and Meteor shower weather events! Meteors would be very rare, but they would cause immense damage in a rather large radius around the point of impact. Note: because asteroids generally have precious metals in them, maybe the impact could create ore mines. Meteor showers would be less damaging, but over a large area. They would create smaller ore mines.

The numbers of actual asteroid impacts are excruciatingly small, especially in such a small area. It would be unrealistic.

21) Revolutionary Concept: No map edges? In Alpha Centauri, there are only two map 'edges'; the other two 'sides' blend into each other. This would add a little realism. This may be a little weird for RMS, but it may be a neat idea.

No it would not be more realistic. The battlefields in 0ad would be nowhere near as large enough to allow for the curvature of the earth to kick into effect. They might as well be flat, for all conventions.

I guess the bridge idea is somewhat viable, but I don't like it.

Also,

They should tak about 20 minutes to regrow.

I plan on winning a game before 20 mins is up, being the Micro/rushing SoB I am...

=D

Edited March 16, 2005 by Bakayaro

[Aeros]

What if a bridge is destroyed while an army of units is ontop of it?

[Mythos_Ruler]

They fall in the water and sink to the bottom due to the armor they are wearing.... they die.

[Phoenix-TheRealDeal]

Not all units wear armour. What happens to those that don't?

[Petsuchos Ra]

Note for the bridges: There probably should be a distance limit of some kind, as in ancient times, they couldn't build transoceanic bridges

[Petsuchos Ra]

27) In RMS, I would like there to be a way to place a 'cluster' of lands or terrain, like groups for object generation.

28) I would like a LOT more control where to place cliffs and elevation in an RMS.

29) Different RMS placement patterns; for example, all of the players start in a circle around a lake, etc.

30) If the RMS is as complicated as AOM's, I would like an RMS editing program.

31) Cool-looking rope bridges with swinging animation

Edited March 17, 2005 by Petsuchos Ra

[Petsuchos Ra]

This does micro for the player, which destroys gameplay. I don't like this.

←

In history, did the commander say to the soldiers "All right, everybody attack the

guy that's closest to you."? No, he wanted the archers to attack the infantry and

avoid cavalry, he wanted the infantry to attack cavalry and avoid archers, and he

wanted the cavalry to attack archers and avoid infantry. It would increase realism.

[Petsuchos Ra]

Even more ideas:

Animals:

Huntable Animals:

32) Wooly mammoths---Incredibly strong and hard to kill, but when it is killed, it provides the 0ad equivalent of 1000 AOK food! They probably would be used mainly in scenarios and RMSes.

33) Deer

34) Rhinos

35) Crocodiles

36) Snakes

37) Walruses

38) Elephants

39) Hyenas

40) Bison

41) Tigers

42) Lions

43) Wolves

44) Arctic Wolves

45) Musk Oxen

46) Bears

47) Polar Bears

48) Penguins

49) Llamas

50) Zebras

51) Prewalski's Horse---or whatever it is called. A prehistoric-type wild horse that lives in Mongolia(I think it's Mongolia). Would be neat for certain RMSes and scenarios

52) Sheep

53) Sabertooth tigers

Aquatic Stuff:

54) Whales---Maybe like deer in the water? Wanders around in the water, and you have to kill it before gathering food from it. Maybe a random chance of the whale attacking the boat and sinking it?

55) Orca Whales---Like wolves in the water? Wanders around, attacking ships?

56) Trout

57) Perch

58) Stingrays?---Maybe attack fishing villagers?

59) Salmon

60) Carp

61) Bullhead---Hard to kill, and only a small amount of food?

Aquatic Pests:

62) Jellyfish?---The infamous Man O' War jellyfish. Maybe it attacks villagers too close to the water? Maybe it attacks ships? Maybe just eyecandy?

Aquatic Plants:

63) Seaweed---Works similarly to berry bushes?

64) Kelp---Works similarly to berry bushes?

Birds:

65) Hawk

66) Condor

67) Vultures

68) Sparrows---Or something similar

69) Quetzal---Brightly colored bird with long green tail feathers. Would be used mainly in tropical maps.

[Gunthahaha]

You can EDIT your posts

This does micro for the player, which destroys gameplay. I don't like this.

I agree with Bakayaro

[Bakayaro]

In history, did the commander say to the soldiers "All right, everybody attack the

guy that's closest to you."? No, he wanted the archers to attack the infantry and

avoid cavalry, he wanted the infantry to attack cavalry and avoid archers, and he

wanted the cavalry to attack archers and avoid infantry. It would increase realism. cool.gif

In history, more specifically, at the battle of Agincourt, the french knights (cavalry) got their butts reamed by the english longbowmen (archers). (Although Agincourt is outside of this time period)

And keep in mind that this is not a prehistoric setting. It is around 0ad, give or take 500 years.

31) Cool-looking rope bridges with swinging animation

What happens when one of my archers shoots it with a flaming-rag arrow, and your army is on that cool-looking rope bridge?

Note for the bridges: There probably should be a distance limit of some kind, as in ancient times, they couldn't build transoceanic bridges

We, modern day humans, can't build really long bridges either, but the thing is, the distances on the battlefield in this game aren't ginormous, so there shouldn't be a problem. Keep in mind the proportions here.

55) Orca Whales---Like wolves in the water? Wanders around, attacking ships?

If I remember correctly, Orcas don't habitually attack ships, and are rather benevolent unless attacked first.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Not all units wear armour. What happens to those that don't?

For gameplay purposes, the units die.

[Titus Ultor]

Also, the chunks of the bridges and friends and all that sort of thing would drown other soldiers. It's not very likely that you'll swim after falling to the water and getting crushed by various hunks of wood or stone.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Exactly. There should be immediate and dangerous drawbacks to using bridges, as well as immediate and substancial advantages.

Building a bridge:

Pros:

Continual flow of troops from one combat zone to another

Transport large quanitities of units

No need to transport troops by ship

Cons:

Long to build

Expensive

Dangerous to use

[Bakayaro]

Here's another con:

Blocks Ships.

In fact, I'm gonna start working on a "bridge wall" strat. But basically, I have an evil, nasty, idea of how to use bridges to make an impregnable defense. (Wooden bridges and regrowing trees!)

Theoretically, you could then build a "bridge" around your island on an island map and use it to block off ships from all but one area (the area between where the bridge starts and where it ends), couldn't you?

[Caesar]

How would I go about submitting an article to the 0 AD history archive?

Secondly: Will archers be able to run out of arrows? eg. they can only fire for so long and then they "run out of arrows" and will have to wait so long until they can attack again. Same goes for siege weapons like ballistas and onagers.

Edited March 18, 2005 by Caesar89

[Petsuchos Ra]

Secondly: Will archers be able to run out of arrows? eg. they can only fire for so long and then they "run out of arrows" and will have to wait so long until they can attack again. Same goes for siege weapons like ballistas and onagers.

←

I hope not!

[Aeros]

Hmm, I'm thinking a bridge would be awesome to use in certain gameplay situations in the campaigns

[Paal_101]

How would I go about submitting an article to the 0 AD history archive?

←

Choose a topic, write something over 500 words long with sources included and send it to me for evaluation. We'll see what happens then

Anything in particular that you want to do?

[Quacker]

Theoretically, you could then build a "bridge" around your island on an island map and use it to block off ships from all but one area (the area between where the bridge starts and where it ends), couldn't you?

←

Uh, no. I'm sure there will be a limit to the length of the bridges (if implemented). After all, we didn't have mega-uber huge bridges in 233 AD.

Either that or it'd be so darn expensive no one could pull it off.

[Caesar]

Anything in particular that you want to do?

←

Well the article I've written is called Who Killed Julius Caesar

I dont know if that would go under biographies or roman history archives. I am aslo currently writing an article about Spartacus.

Edited March 19, 2005 by Caesar89

[Petsuchos Ra]

70) No limits in the editor! Example: being able to make hills in water, place water units on land, and land units in water, etc. No more complicated tricks for good eyecandy.

[Lord Zorinthrox]

Good idea, but it would probably be better to have a check box when in unit placing mode that diasables movement type discrimination. Normally you would be restricted in placing units on terrain. Boats would have to be placed on water, etc. Then, you could check the box, and be able to place objects anywhere. You could call it "movement type binding." On second thought, it would be checked by default, then unchecked to disable it.

I think it would be really awesome for the editor to be able to edit water surfaces like it does normal terrain. For instance, being able to raise "hills" of water in the middle of a lake. It would really be useful for rivers and waterfalls. On a similar note, how about several water textures? Like, some that ripple in one direction, and others that ripple in a different direction. Texture blending would have to be implemented into water surfaces, though. AND (almost done) logic that creates wakes wround objects (such as boulders) in water in the direction of the water's course. It could be related to the water texture the object is placed in. For instance, a rock placed in "water45degreeflow" would have a wake effect flowing arounf it at 45 degrees from North on the map.

Which brings up another idea: terrain dependant animations. When infantry walk through marsh, they slogg and stomp through. Better yet, as the "deepness" of snow increases, denoted by the snow texture the unit walks across, the animation elevation relative to the unit's position gets progressively lower and lower, until the units are knee deep or so. And I suppose in there would also be movement penalties for walking through tough terrain like marshes, snow, mud, and the like.

EDIT: Just had another idea. What about being able to build walls off the sides of fortresses as well as stand-alone? You could have a "Great Wall of China" thing going. And that would necesitate the enlargement of the size of walls from the standard RTS size (which I always thought was rather slim for a defensive structure). Also, the ability to voluntarily build different grades of walls. For instance, you could choose to build slim, medium, of Fortress grade walls. Or something like that. Anyways, I think it would be cool. Would make it too micro, though...the secind part, not the first.

Edited March 23, 2005 by Lord Zorinthrox

[Aeros]

Not quite either of those options

[Argalius]

Well we know you can't walk on it, but what is it then, if it isn't a barrier...

[Titus Ultor]

Like a tower, I'm guessing? Garrisonable, but not transversable.