LordGood Posted December 31, 2013 Report Share Posted December 31, 2013 NO HISTORICAL HEROS MASHUPLimit the historical heros you can have to 1, so that you don't end up with heros of different eras fighting together.only one hero can be on the map at any given time already Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProvencalLeGaullois Posted December 31, 2013 Report Share Posted December 31, 2013 (...) so that you don't end up with heros of different eras fighting together.that's the difference between a simulation and a game. A game should (my opinion) always favoring the gameplay over realism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted December 31, 2013 Report Share Posted December 31, 2013 PLAYER CHAMPIONI would like to see a custom hero that represents the faction you are playing with, as in Age of Empires 3. A character who can build houses and civ centres and has special abilities depending on the culture.NO HISTORICAL HEROS MASHUPLimit the historical heros you can have to 1, so that you don't end up with heros of different eras fighting together.Im starting About this one , may be have whole new advanced match setup panel, limit heroes 1-3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greycat Posted December 31, 2013 Report Share Posted December 31, 2013 (edited) that's the difference between a simulation and a game. A game should (my opinion) always favoring the gameplay over realism.A 'war game' traditionaly prefers realism though... "These games are based upon real events and attempt to represent a reasonable approximation of the actual forces, terrain, and other material factors faced by the actual participants"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargaminghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/HG_Wells_playing_to_Little_Wars.jpg Edited December 31, 2013 by greycat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted December 31, 2013 Report Share Posted December 31, 2013 A 'war game' traditionaly prefers realism though... "These games are based upon real events and attempt to represent a reasonable approximation of the actual forces, terrain, and other material factors faced by the actual participants"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargaminghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/HG_Wells_playing_to_Little_Wars.jpg he may be are taking about RTS all RTS are a wargaming but not all wargaming are RTS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revan Shan Posted December 31, 2013 Report Share Posted December 31, 2013 only one hero can be on the map at any given time alreadyOh. That's cool then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted December 31, 2013 Report Share Posted December 31, 2013 A 'war game' traditionaly prefers realism though... "These games are based upon real events and attempt to represent a reasonable approximation of the actual forces, terrain, and other material factors faced by the actual participants"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargaminghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/HG_Wells_playing_to_Little_Wars.jpgThe highest percentage of war-themed games that are not wargames come from the video game industry. Most markedly real-time strategy games (such as StarCraft) deal with combat nearly exclusively, but the gameplay-enhancing conventions of the genre also destroy realism. For example, in actual combat, vehicle armor is generally a binary proposition. Either the round penetrates and the vehicle is knocked out, or it does not and the vehicle is unaffected. RTS games make a habit of giving a vehicle a "health bar" that generally allows it to survive even powerful single shots, but each hit reduces its health by some amount, allowing a high volume of rifle fire to knock out a well armored tank. Other notable genre conventions include the construction of buildings and vehicles within the timeframe of a battle (i.e., hours, if not less) and a lack of any command and control, supply, or morale systems.A major determinant of the complexity and size of a wargame is how realistic it is intended to be. Some games constitute a serious study of the subject at hand, whereas others are intended to be light entertainment. In general, a more serious study will have longer, more detailed rules, more complexity, and more record keeping. More casual games may only bear a passing resemblance to the subject, although many still try to encourage the same types of decision making as the player's historical counterparts, and thereby bring forth the "feel" of the conflict.Wargames tend to have a few fundamental problems. Notably, both player knowledge, and player action are much less limited than what would be available to the player's real-life counterparts. Some games have rules for command and control and fog of war, using various methods. While results vary, many of these mechanisms can be cumbersome and onerous in traditional games. The "edge of world problem" raises the issue of what to do at the artificial boundary of the physical edge of a board game, in contrast to real life where there is no "edge" and units off-board can have a tangible effect on a scenario. Computer wargames can more easily incorporate these features because the computer can conceal information from players and act as an impartial judge (even while playing one side). However, due to interface issues, these can still be found to be as frustrating to the player as traditional methods. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hollth Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 Any chance of having a FPS cap added? I'm getting 300-500 fps for all out of game menus/screens, which is pretty overkill haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niektb Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 Any chance of having a FPS cap added? I'm getting 300-500 fps for all out of game menus/screens, which is pretty overkill hahaEveryone does in menu, so what? In game you won't get such FPS's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabio Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 Add this to your local.cfg:vsync = trueEventually it could be made the default (less system load/heat/flicker). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godzilla Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 Thank you for making a Egyptian civ.I wanted to suggest to make a Arabia and China civ...after all it is the silk road and other game ignore what is happening at these times in these areas. Good game, but I think their is way more western civs in the game and I think it need to be even out. At this even Egypt can be considered western. or well starting to become westernized. Thank You, the game looks awesome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki1950 Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 There is a mod team working on the Han Chinese which is the relevant one for the time period that the game covers ATM not that many cultures where active in the Arabian peninsula in this time period.Enjoy the Choice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodmar Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 I read that it is not possible to have units on top of manned defensive buildings.Instead, would it be possible to have a second set of building "sprites" displayed when they are garrisoned so that "virtual" defenders would appear on top of them (actually part of the animated sprites) when they are attacked (or even a sentry or a night-watch in the other case)? Not unlike in Rise of Legends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanderd17 Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 Adding a model, even an animated model, should be possible. But the model wouldn't resemble the garrisoned soldier in any way. It can look strange, if you garrison an elephant in a fortress, that suddenly a regular unit appears on top of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordGood Posted January 1, 2014 Report Share Posted January 1, 2014 Maybe not, the mahout is a person, and I don't think elephants can even garrison buildings can they? having advanced archers on the rooftops seems like a happy medium between champion and basic units.also, we would need animations, and some way to code them to aim and fire with enemy soldiers in range. A lot more trouble than it's worth atm imho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 No you didn't. There was for a while patches where units died along with the building but I changed that since I was told in IRC that it is used only for ships. ask for be included into game credits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 Terrain has little to nothing to do to how well an individual soldier from a culture fights. Its mostly only the strategies and personal condition involved that terrain and weather applies. It does not make sense to me that somebody gets a bonus for being next to a tree? in many cases was a ambush in other was the Weather. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 I added a patch that has support units with slow healing. Units won't die on destruction but eject, in keeping with the trend.I don't think it'll make early raids necessarily ineffective, they just need to put more focus to destroying houses. AFAIK that was one central focus in the real-life raids back in the days. good you can use our trac to open tickets and be part of team. Or team contributor.Sorry I'm asking one for one. I considerate necessary put clear some things, open tickets in the trac for people want contribute with a patch , and close tickets that can be discussed like a common issue problem o ask trough IRC Channel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 Adding a model, even an animated model, should be possible. But the model wouldn't resemble the garrisoned soldier in any way. It can look strange, if you garrison an elephant in a fortress, that suddenly a regular unit appears on top of it. we can add some line like to forbidden class to be show at top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodmar Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 (...) having advanced archers on the rooftops seems like a happy medium between champion and basic units.also, we would need animations, and some way to code them to aim and fire with enemy soldiers in range. A lot more trouble than it's worth atm imhoYou are right, it would be only cosmetic.To be precise, this kind of animated model would be a half-mesure between an visually empty fortification and a "terrain" fortification where normal, non-resized, garrisoned units would go and fight with bonus. It would be an alternative to a tower "with a flag on top", however much costlier to program. So, no elephants, no riders, no champions, no civilians. Only pre-determined defenders based on the civ. For the Roman, archers, sentries and pila throwers on the walls and maybe a ballista on upgraded stone towers, for instance.Maybe such fortification parts could be described as objects like "formations". Going near a garrisoned enemy fortification would create an instance of such "formations" depending on the health of the structure (when at detection range). To decrease the computing load, a wall would appear manned only if flanked by a garrisoned tower. When the attack is over, the "formation" would be dismissed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalmeldor Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Love the game!I have a couple of ideas, and if they have already been mentioned, forgive me.1. You could display the civilization that the player is currently playing2. You could display the total number of gatherers per resource Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Love the game!I have a couple of ideas, and if they have already been mentioned, forgive me.1. You could display the civilization that the player is currently playing2. You could display the total number of gatherers per resourcebayou mean in top bar right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeta1127 Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) General Meldor, when playing a match, there is a unique emblem for each faction with a tooltip in the top center of the screen that shows who you are playing as, and I believe the number of gathers per resource is a planned feature. Edited January 3, 2014 by Zeta1127 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoekeloosNL Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Any plans for dust effects when artillery rocks hit walls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oshron Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Adding a model, even an animated model, should be possible. But the model wouldn't resemble the garrisoned soldier in any way. It can look strange, if you garrison an elephant in a fortress, that suddenly a regular unit appears on top of it.actually, it WOULD make sense: the elephant is stored away in the fort and the guy commanding it goes to the ramparts to defend. same reason a tank driver would still be trained to fight on foot if the need arises 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.