Suggestions for 0 A.D.

[buggy123]

that level of detail would be nice.

[julius1]

hey!!!... how come we havent got any new screenshots since summer. >.<

[buggy123]

lol you know that the game is out (the barebones, no AI, no nothing) for developers. You can take all the screenshots u want

[julius1]

ya but i don't know how to download it.i keep trying but i cant fidure it out >.<.can somebody please send me the download link.

[buggy123]

you have to download the source code and build it with a compiler (I think)

[julius1]

I tried to play the game but when i clicked on it it showed a blank white screen saying

(Pyrogenesis.exe has encountered a problem and needs to

close. We are sorry for the inconvenience.)

ummmmm can somebody please help me out!!!

[atticusbc]

I don't know if anyone has posted what I got to say before and I lacked the inclination to read 47 pages of forum. So sorry if this is a repeat.

My ideas are thus:

1: Please don't have archers be able to bring down stone walls. It pisses me off to no end, in AoE for example, when a giant stone wall is brought down by plinky little arrows. Fire arrows against wood walls is one thing, but you need big siege weapons to bring down a stone wall.

2:Please don't over power one civ. It may not be historically accurate but keep the balance. For example in Rome: Total War the Romans stomped over everything once they got legionaries because the legionaries had armor, damage, health, and numbers out the yin yang. I just say this because I want to play the Celts in 0 A.D., and I know if you're TOO accurate they will get stomped on by every other civ you put in the game.

kthnxbai, ~atticus

[buggy123]

1. I agree. It's pretty lame/funny when ur bastion walls get pwned by fire arrows and dudes throwing torches at it.

2. I'm sure there will be a good civ balance. After all, that is part of the goal. To create a fun and historically accurate game that is available for everyone

Edited December 17, 2009 by buggy123

[Mythos_Ruler]

In other games like Age of Empires 3 or Age of Mythology, armor was expressed in percentage. So, basically a building would have something like 80% pierce armor, which means an archer which deals 10 pierce attach would cause 2 damage per strike. In 0 A.D. the armor values are given in absolutes... so if a structure has 20 pierce armor, then an archer with 10 pierce attack would cause 0 damage. At any rate, 0 A.D.'s buildings will have pretty high health points, so even if an archer did 1 or 2 damage to the structure, it would take thousands of arrows to bring it down. lol

It's safe to say you will definitely need siege engines to bring down enemy buildings, otherwise you can capture the building instead if you have enough troops to do it.

As far as faction balance goes, the Romans in Part 1 will be the Republican Romans from the 1st and 2nd Punic Wars era when they were beat quite a few times on the battlefield. They'll have good infantry and siege weapons (plus the ability to build expensive Quinquiremes), but pretty much mediocre everything else for balance.

Edited December 17, 2009 by Mythos_Ruler

[wbernadas]

i was just wondering is it all going to be just battles or is there going to be some domestic area to the game as if you had to build or add to your village or town and in case defend it while you are also fighting in other places?.i think it be a good idea to do..keep the players on there toes and gives you a little more to do other then just build a army and go off fighting its the other side of building a empire...making sure your people who are non-combatants are taking care of so they can take care of the building the farming the teaching and so on and so forth ..just me and a few friends of mine been looking for a game that gives both the fighting and thinking on the battle field and also off it. it took more then winning battles to make kings...but also taking care of ones people and city that made him remembered..that was just my thought be nice to get some feed back or reply on it..thanks.

[Mythos_Ruler]

There will be a lot of city building as well as economic activity too.

http://www.moddb.com/games/0-ad/images/car...houses#imagebox

[plumo]

Will soldiers change skin when gathering resources?

To unarmoured?

[bihan]

my suggestions are

1) don't just send an animal on trading, a trader should be there. (i.e: a man on a horseback - turns into a horse cart when upgraded or a man going with a donkey brings 2 donkeys when upgraded.)

2)the people should be able to swim. (a one type of unit which can swim is also gud.)

[zerothis]

From the FAQ

Will the player be able to place traps or lay mines?

No traps are planned for any civilisations under development, and obviously we're in the wrong historical period to use mines and other explosives.

You might want to mention in the FAQ the use of Unconventional Weapons. Also consider that some Unconventional Weapons can be considered traps. Wrong time period and area, but for an example: In on battle, Conquisador's saw thousands of natives spread evenly in an open field reverently standing in cloaks with their head bowed and backs turn toward the quietly approaching army. It was considered to good an opportunity for a surprise attack. So the entire army was order to charge in and kill all they could. But, these were not cloaked natives. They were cloaked beehives on poles. Each soldier that realized the error tried to retreat. But they were disoriented by the attack and bumping into more beehives. Many soldiers continued to charge onto the field unaware of the bee attack. Many attempted to run past agitated bees and avoid the hives that were not yet disturbed. This is when the real natives, hidden outside the field, launched their arrows into the unagitated beehives. Closer to 0 A.D.'s time and place (and mentioned in WFG historical records). The Heptakometes placed their bee farms in a vally where enemies were likely to attack. They also planted flowers in the area that were known to make honey toxic when the bees visited them. They Heptakometes to avoid eating the honey when the plants were flowering. But the Roman army was unaware and could not resist taking the honey as spoils. The Heptakometes attacked while the army was suffering the effects of poison. A simular trap was used against romans. Defenders pretended to drop their equipment to speed their retreat. Included in the dropped equipment was distilled alcohol. The drunken Romans were attacked during their victory party.

Edited February 12, 2010 by zerothis

[feneur]

As you might notice the article that mentions Unconventional weapons is one of our History articles and not an article on the game itself. Thus I don't see any reason to mention it in the FAQ.

[zerothis]

* Can wild animals be tamed and/or brought under the control of a civ?

Certain animals (such as goats and cows) can be domesticated and herded by nearby cavalry, which can then be corraled if the player wishes. Other animals (including dangerous ones) can be hunted. Some civilisations can herd and corral unusual wild animals, such as camels and elephants, to convey special cavalry bonuses.

The Romans had domesticated snails which they brought to Celtic Briton. They require a very specific chalky, high in limestone soil. They don't really stray from the habitats that were artificially constructed in Briton, so these are usually found exactly where the Celts or Romans placed their ancestors.

There is evidence that the ancient Celts kept deer as pets, a very limited practice. Romans attempted to keep some in pens in Roman Briton. Full domestication is unproven, possibly just tamed.

Cassius Dio records that war elephants were brought to Celtic Briton. The "questing beast" of Arthurian legend matches the description of an elephant. Celts were talking about elephants centuries after their first arrival. So either these elephants made a tremendous impression (they were meant to) or a population of them was left there.

Though it is commonly assumed Normans and/or Saxons brought rabbits to Briton. It may have been the Romans. The Romans probably brought white cattle, guinea fowl, chickens, rabbits, domestic cats, and snails (mentioned above). Note that elephants left no physical evidence; just Cassius Dio's report and the tale of the "questing beast". It was officially illegal in the Roman for non-nobility to own domestic cats. But it still happened, and Briton was a long was from Rome. Of course there were stray cats .

Please check my limited facts

PS:

corraled > corralled

civilisations > civilizations

[Tyrannosaurus]

A playable civilization I would like to see in the game is Nubia. They would specialize in archers and cavalry (there is even some evidence that the Nubians used war elephants) but have relatively weak infantry and armor. They could also have strong defensive structures.

[Aldandil]

This is my suggestion: it would be great if the random-map-generator randomly adds plants and animals appropriate to the biome.

[feneur]

This is my suggestion: it would be great if the random-map-generator randomly adds plants and animals appropriate to the biome.

That's the idea

[Sophokles]

That would be beautiful, but I think a problem that would emerge in early testing would be that strategic animals would be placed in odd positions, like too far or close to the players, or on inaccessible islands. It would just suck to start a random map game and find out that your opponent has all the camels and horses while you just have anteaters near your base.

Of course, I'm sure there is an easy way around that.

[Aldandil]

Well, if the map starts with buildings on the board, the random map generator could be programmed not to put wild animals within a certain radius of human settlements. But since most species of wild animals will be programmed to flee humans (except the very aggressive ones), I think that they'll try to clear out of player-controlled areas pretty quickly once the game starts.

I don't know how the programmers could prevent inequitable distributions of strategically useful animals, though.

[ScionOfWar]

It's easy to prevent too much unbalance, at least when placing the units. But if they have flight or fight responses similar to real wildlife, then the game board can change in favor of a player even if every critter on the map is meticulously placed for balance. I worked on RMS scripts in AoM and it was possible to create clusters of animals distanced from other clusters and buildings and forests, ect.. However, in AoM, the animals just stood there, even if you slaughtered their buddy nearby.

Theoretically, if the deer run from your army like they would in reality, then a clever player could corall all the huntable animals to his side of the map, effectively herding them away from their opponent.

Though this might lead to one player having more food then the other, I find it perfectly reasonable and realistic. Food like deer *do* run. And if you're not careful, deer could be herded and/or stolen from your side of the map by your enemy, making it difficult to ever get them back. Guess you're stuck with farming!

Personally I think balance should be sacrificed in favor of realism and strategy. This is one such instance

Edited February 22, 2010 by ScionOfWar

[Aldandil]

It sounds like a reasonable economic strategy to me. And perhaps it would simply be balanced by the fact that your citizen-soldiers are running around hunting instead of doing something else.

Edited February 23, 2010 by Aldandil

[oshron]

i can think of only one suggestion outside of completely changing the game, and would probably come in a later release: two more phases after City. the fourth phase would be Empire, comparably in international status to what the earlier roman empire was to its surrounding countries, and the fifth would be Legend, when your civilization becomes so large and powerful that memory of it is never lost(again, as was the case with rome)

though not for the initial release, i would also suggest a third official release of 0AD that would include more civilizations that the initial civilizations didnt encounter(like perhaps the Han Chinese and Yamato Japanese) from 500bc-500ad, fitting in with the previously established criteria because, from what i can tell, the civilizations at the moment are just rome and whatever peoples they encountered, with 500bc-1bc for the first release and 1ad-500ad for the second release, so i think worldwide cultures for both periods would be the next logical direction to go in

[silnarm]

Theoretically, if the deer run from your army like they would in reality, then a clever player could corall all the huntable animals to his side of the map, effectively herding them away from their opponent.

Though this might lead to one player having more food then the other, I find it perfectly reasonable and realistic. Food like deer *do* run. And if you're not careful, deer could be herded and/or stolen from your side of the map by your enemy, making it difficult to ever get them back. Guess you're stuck with farming!

Personally I think balance should be sacrificed in favor of realism and strategy. This is one such instance

Balance should not be compromised for realism in a game, and that's a dubious and not very realistic strategy anyway, imho.

Easily solved though, just don't put all the animals on the map at once. Spawn new animals once and a while at the edges of the map and/or other locations that no player has unfogged. Problem solved, no more potential balance problem and more realism, the 'world' is presumably bigger than that toy map after all