Suggestions for 0 A.D.

[SMST]

Something i played with in my mind was a to make a mod for the game, expanding 0 A.D., as the hypothetical second part would do, but in the other direction of the timeline.

Which means: The ancient civilisations BEFORE the Rise of Greece and Rome. The mid eastern culture, with their grand city states, maginificent buildings and large armies.

The civilisations would be:

Egypt

Persia

(which could be taken from the original game because in the end, it would fit better in the timeframe of the expansion mod)

Mesopotamia

(Subfactions Assyrians/Babylonians, such as Poleis/Macedonians for the original Hellenes faction)

Hittites

Mycenean Greeks

(NOT the classical Greece but the civilisation described in Homer's great epoi)

... and, you guessed it, the Hebrews bzw. the Kingdom of Judaea.

But all of this is "future music" (a German expression for things that are not yet to be realised because of missing foundations) until 0 A.D. 1 is released.

Edited May 6, 2010 by SMST

[Kimball]

Well you've certainly shown in the last few weeks your dedication to research. What's the harm in forming a DD of your own and building a team around your idea? Though the game is far from complete, it is already receptive of mod folders and it's built to accept additional assets. Since the development of artistic assets doesn't require the game to be finished, if you're truly passionate about your idea, I would highly recommend getting a group together.

[SMST]

To make this idea real, this needs to be a real concept rather than what it is right now - an idea. You must know best that there is nothing worse for a project if you have a bunch of unsorted ideas in your head and no order to them.

But i definitley want to do that mod, and when i have found a new way to gain access to a precious resource called "time", i will draw the first real concept of that mod and present it here.

[Kimball]

Well, a list of civilizations you intend to include is clearly less helpful than even the most rudimentary of outlines. I definitely recognize that you need an in depth design document to get started, as I suggested.

[SMST]

Indeed. And that is what i am going to do.

Sorry for my English, i think people misunderstand me all the time because of that.

[Kimball]

Heh, don't worry about it. Your English is good enough to the point that I hadn't noticed that you weren't a native speaker until you mentioned it!

Just as a suggestion, I'd open a new thread once you get a list of units for your factions together. No use in letting it get lost in here!

[SMST]

Heh, don't worry about it. Your English is good enough to the point that I hadn't noticed that you weren't a native speaker until you mentioned it!

Oh, that is nice of you to say!

Just as a suggestion, I'd open a new thread once you get a list of units for your factions together. No use in letting it get lost in here!

Yes, i will most probably open a thread in the mod section. I already witnessed that there are two greater mod projects announced in the mod section - "For Honor and Glory" and "Colonial A.D."

If all those projects suceed ... we would have a "Pyrogenesis RTS series" with almost continous timeline:

1. My idea - hm, the child needs a name.

2. 0 A.D. 1

3. 0 A.D. 2

4. For Honour and Glory

5. Colonial A.D.

*dreaming*

[Kimball]

I gotta say, I think the two projects in the Mod section are slightly over-ambitious. Though I do love that people are passionate about creating mods for 0 A.D., and I do wholeheartedly support their efforts, an aspect of realistic expectations needs to be accounted for when designing a mod. Faction creation isn't nearly as tedious as it was in Age of Mythology (AoM), but it does require more effort than it did in games like AoE and RTW. In those games, most units used existing models (in some cases out of necessity) and many shared the same low-resolution textures.

Modding in 0 A.D. is streamlined in that you will be able to make efficient use of existing resources (such as base models for human units), and we made sure not to limit the designer in his capabilities. Recognize, though, that it does share some aspects of the complexity of a mod developed for AoM, in that each unit has its own texture and that your mod may require some additional 3D work depending on just how accurate you want your faction to be. Adding factions is one thing, but changing the era for the environment and developing a whole new set of factions (ie. Colonial A.D.) will require nearly as much work as it took to make the game itself, especially if the developer chooses to pursue accurate representations of some of the weapons found in that time period as opposed to simple developer's trickery (for example, including unique projectiles in the animation to circumvent the implementation of new flight path parameters). Each has its disadvantages, and I need not advocate one way or another, but it is something that you'll need to consider when outlining your mod idea.

[oshron]

hey, here's an idea: when you capture a territory, civic buildings like houses within that area are automatically transferred over to you, though defensive and military buildings like towers and barracks remain in enemy control, so you still have to destroy or capture them. how does that sound?

[Kimball]

Sounds like an interesting idea, and it does have its merits. Features like that will be best suited for consideration and inclusion once we get a foothold on testing the gameplay and balancing the factions.

How would overpopulation be accounted for then? Would the number simply run over and prevent the player from training new units until additional housing units are constructed or the units die off? Would there be some sort of penalty for having more bodies than places to sleep?

You also mentioned that military structures would remain under enemy control. What exactly would constitute as control over a territory. Being that there are enemy structures here, I assume that this territory was under enemy control, so would the destruction of non-economic buildings (houses, mills etc.) be necessary to exercise proper control over that territory? How would temples and other non-threatening, but also non-economic buildings (Government/Special buildings) be handled?

[oshron]

i was imagining it in a kind of scorched earth sense for a modern era mod that i have ideas for. basically, when you capture a civic center (which i assume would be the focal point of a territory and capturing it or building a new settlement on top of it would transfer control of that territory over to you), the non-military buildings automatically go to you because the general populace has little choice but to cooperate with you, whereas the soldiers, and therefore the defensive structures and military buildings like towers and barracks, and possibly docks, would remain under enemy control and have to be captured or destroyed individually, basically meaning that those would be centers of resistance in the newly captured province and they would have to be subdued

for the scorched earth thing i mentioned earlier, if the town is captured, all buildings that could benefit the enemy--houses, farms, and production buildings--are automatically destroyed so that they cant use them for themselves but the towers remain so that they continue staging resistance

[Aldandil]

Oshron, that's a good idea. It sounds like a seige scenario, where the individual fortresses and barracks hold out even though most of the countryside is taken. I don't know if it is too complicated for 0 A.D., but no doubt there are some types of military buildings that can withstand a seige and others that require frequent resupply and civilian/economic support to put up a fight. Those would probably need to be differentiated if possible.

There's also the question of the concept of guerrilla resistance, even after a territory is captured. I think 0 A.D. has no morale meter, but the continued resistance of surviving military units in a more guerilla-style manner might also be an option, even if most military buildings are taken, provided there's suitable cover in the landscape. There could also be economic units who run off to join them as support, though I don't know how that could be handled.

In fact, the game engine need not distinguish, at least for non-AI factions, between "fighting to capture territory held by the enemy" and "fighting to recapture territory captured by the enemy." In both cases, the territory is held by one faction while the other has units in the territory trying to take it.

Then again, this entire guerrilla concept might be totally inappropriate for the time periods covered, at least outside the Iberian faction.

Edited May 7, 2010 by Aldandil

[Mythos_Ruler]

You also mentioned that military structures would remain under enemy control. What exactly would constitute as control over a territory.

Building a Civic Centre on a settlement of course.

[oshron]

a thought occurs to me: this idea wouldnt really work on non-provincial maps (i may be wrong here; im under teh impression that you can decide whether or not you want to play on a map with provinces). this would also pose some problems having to do with major god bonuses and civilization powers for my mod ideas. some civilization powers i came up with, for instance, involve provinces on maps and concern units entering or exiting them (for example, the Soviet Iron Curtain power makes it so that no units can enter or exit soviet territories for a minute or two). but then, how would this work on non-provincial maps, both with certain civilization powers and with my aforementioned capturing idea?

i think a solution may be to program it to recognize both map types differently. on provincial maps, it affects everything within a territory, but on non-provincial maps, it affects everything within a certain distance of teh civic center, lets say 50% more than the civic center's inherent line of sight (so that no bonuses to LOS that are applied are taken into effect; in distance terms, this would probably be something like an in-game quarter of a mile or even half a mile)

[UberSauce]

@ Kimball

i did not think that having biblical factions would affend peolpe but thinking about it i see your right and i thank you for enlightning me about the possible issue

and not to add to your already big list of "to does"

i would really be gratefull if you could but togethor a little preview video

just a suggestion for all us fans

-UberSuace-

Edited May 7, 2010 by UberSauce

[oshron]

will ranged units, or at least ranged cavalry, be able to attack while in motion? if not, i suggest that as being a bonus for any nomadic tribes that would be included in the second pack, particularly the huns and/or mongols

[SMST]

Would be a great special ability for a "Parthian Horse Archer" unit for Part 2, since they were famous for doing accurate shots from horseback while moving and retreating.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Yeah, such an ability would require advanced pathfinding and unit AI. It can be done, but I think it would be something added to part 2 for the Parthians and Huns.

[oshron]

awesome. that means the Hit and Run cultural power i came up with for my modern Mongol faction works would it also be applicable with tanks? and possibly mecha?

[Aldandil]

I was looking at the design document and I have a few changes and details to suggest for the fauna. I'm not sure if I mentioned the lion before but here are my opinions:

Lions: I've seen photos of Asian lions and unless the photos were mis-identified, they have manes; Greek vases also show manes. North African "Barbary" lions had heavy manes that extended over their whole belly. For example, ccording to ADW they had manes, just shorter ones than African lions. This is not an academic site but scholarly sources should confirm this.

Elephants: should be edible

Dolphins: should also be edible, and if there's only one texture it should represent the common dolphin Delphinus delphis, the species depicted on the wall-paintings at Knossos

Seals: AFAIK Mediterranean monk seals were the main species in the Mediterranean, so they should be this species

Sharks: I don't think sharks attack people very often so I think unprovoked attacks should be a rare occurance, and since they are edible and are still eaten today, IMO they should be reclassified as dangerous consumable animals.

Edited May 20, 2010 by Aldandil

[oshron]

thats one thing i found kind of disappointing about the fauna for 0ad when i read up on that: only a percentage of the animals can be hunted for food. thats how it was in AOE and AOK, but i liked how it was in AOM where any animal you found could be killed for food, unless it was purely aesthetic like a whale or shark(the only consumable marine life in AOM were fish, of which there were only three kinds). i liked that, in desperation, you could go out and hunt dangerous animals like bears, lions, and wolves. thats one thing that i would change: make all of the animals edible

another thing i think would be interesting would be to try to come up with a unique bestiary, or as unique as possible, for each faction that can be mixed and matched in the scenario editor. for example, the carthaginian bestiary would include african elephants and african lions while the iberian bestiary would include the spanish lynx. this is especially prevalent for my two RTS ideas, where pretty much the entire world is represented. and if there were maps that simulated environments for a specific culture, only the bestiary of that culture would be present(ex: only french and british fauna on celtic maps)

i also think dragons should be consumable

[feneur]

Animals are to be unique (though a slight overlap may of course happen if the same animal is found in different areas), but not to a specific civilization but rather to a "biome" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biome for an explanation of the word biome in case you're not familiar with it).

[Mythos_Ruler]

I don't think dragons should be consumable. I am pretty sure an ancient tribe who came upon a dragon corpse would want to bury or burn it, rather than consume a carcass of evil.

[Mythos_Ruler]

I was looking at the design document and I have a few changes and details to suggest for the fauna. I'm not sure if I mentioned the lion before but here are my opinions:

Lions: I've seen photos of Asian lions and unless the photos were mis-identified, they have manes; Greek vases also show manes. North African "Barbary" lions had heavy manes that extended over their whole belly. For example, ccording to ADW they had manes, just shorter ones than African lions. This is not an academic site but scholarly sources should confirm this.

Elephants: should be edible

Dolphins: should also be edible, and if there's only one texture it should represent the common dolphin Delphinus delphis, the species depicted on the wall-paintings at Knossos

Seals: AFAIK Mediterranean monk seals were the main species in the Mediterranean, so they should be this species

Sharks: I don't think sharks attack people very often so I think unprovoked attacks should be a rare occurance, and since they are edible and are still eaten today, IMO they should be reclassified as dangerous consumable animals.

For Part 1 there is no "fishing," so sharks can't be consumable. I know I know. That's just how it is. Right now though elephants are consumable. I am not sure how they are classified in the Wiki DD, but when I made the entities for them I made them consumable (very high amount of food). In the future they will fight back though, probably killing a couple of your dudes in the process.

Edited May 21, 2010 by Mythos_Ruler

[oshron]

this occurred to me in the bath: it would be great for cinematics (assuming cinematics are a part of gameplay during campaigns and user-made scenarios) if there were editor-only objects that depict very large landforms or buildings. these wouldnt have any function for actual gameplay, but they sure take a pretty picture. it would be great to have a cinematic zoom in on a character overlooking an african savannah and you can see a detailed kilimanjaro in the background, or some roman generals look out over the channel from gaul and see the white cliffs of dover