Suggestions for 0 A.D.

[fricus-mazighen]

Disagree in multiple ways. While there are definite exceptions, much of the crowd this game attracts is used to RTS games with little to no blood like Age of Empires (I'm one of them and prefer it that way). It allows the game to be played by a younger audience. It also avoids attracting weirdos getting a kick out of slaughtering civilizations they think of as the "other." Since the game has a tendency to be somewhat educational (lots of research is put into the game to get real military units, timeline, etc.), it makes sense to go for a broader audience.

Also, realistic death requires more animation resources, which is great for high budget games, but this is an open source game.

adding animation isn't proper to high budget games , i mean you can look to a game like battle realms , great combat phases with great animations , so maybe applied to a game like 0 a.d it could make a cracker

[historic_bruno]

hi everyone , i just think you guys should really focus on animation in the next alpha

Adding animations will happen very gradually as we only have 1-2 people working on them and only occasionally. And some things that appear strictly animation-related are actually waiting for the engine to support them, running is an example So even if it was a major focus we wouldn't be able to get much more done without more animators.

2. archers should work backwards when they're attacked by melee units

I agree, there's a lot that needs to change about the behavior of ranged units.

4. Death should be more realistic with blood (lots of blood)

Death and battle could certainly be improved without being excessively bloody or gory, the only blood in the game now seems to be animals and even that's just a temporary hack. I wouldn't expect any kind of fancy decay though, it would just require too much work for the artists IMO.

5. you can add a victory hail or rushing hale , a kind of scream that units will do once engaging a battle

I wouldn't be surprised if some sort of shouting becomes part of the "sounds of battle", and also ordering units to attack should play a certain sound.

(and by the way are you guys planning for an interaction with the terrain ? )

Not sure what you mean by this?

[fricus-mazighen]

Not sure what you mean by this?

i've seen this in battle realms , for example you can add movable rocks that can be pushed and throwed on the enemy's troups , specially when it comes to skirmish battles , or you can burn a forest (in a siege situation for example) , that king of things (infect a terrain to make it not suitable for farming , actually rome did this to carthage )

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

This is just one thought, but perhaps there could be a part 1.5 for 0 A.D. In this part, the Achaean League, Macedonia (from the times of Philip the V and Perseus), the Aetolian League, the Seleucids, possibly the Illyrians, Carthaginians, Romans, Ptolemies, Celts, Iberians, and Maccabees could be included.

[FeXoR]

i have a few things to ask though. can you please stop the A.I spamming forts EVERY WERE! its so cheap, limit the forts to 2-3 max to fix this.

I say: Don't limit anything, balance it...

Edited May 21, 2012 by FeXoR

[Spahbod]

I say: Don't limit anything, balance it...

Completely agree. And what AI is doing is defending itself and as far as i know, it has all the rights to do that. It has a good economy so it builds as much forts as it likes.

[daudbinbutrus]

but in age of empires have rotten corpses. and many gamesyou enable or disable the blood

Agreed there, and in that case it makes some sense. Although I prefer the option to enable gore (initially off) rather than to turn gore off (it makes more sense to allow players to turn it on if they really want it rather than have players that don't want it be turned off or have to see it first). Also, it's still easier to leave it out because that allows parents not to worry if their kid will turn it on.

Personally, somewhat more realistic deaths aren't a problem to me. Rotting corpses in AoE Online (and by rotting I mean sudden change to bones and then disappearing lol) and fly corpses in AoE3 weren't really an issue to me.

[being of darkness]

another good thing would be to be able to conceal units when you are marching in forests so you could set traps and the enemy too, also when you check the reveal option it should reveal only the terrain not what the enemy does, unless there are units nearby, something like the fog of war in aom

[Alpha of the Eagles]

Make the current "Hellenes" into another city-state, like Theban or Corinth. They were pretty prominent.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Make the current "Hellenes" into another city-state, like Theban or Corinth. They were pretty prominent.

I have plans within plans.

[Mythos_Ruler]

i think ar too many hellenic factions, in a Ramdom map the possibility to pick a Hellenic Faction are to high.

"Random" doesn't have to be completely random.

[Mythos_Ruler]

what you mean?

Meaning we don't have to have it so that all civs have an equal chance of being chosen.

[oshron]

Agreed there, and in that case it makes some sense. Although I prefer the option to enable gore (initially off) rather than to turn gore off (it makes more sense to allow players to turn it on if they really want it rather than have players that don't want it be turned off or have to see it first). Also, it's still easier to leave it out because that allows parents not to worry if their kid will turn it on.

Personally, somewhat more realistic deaths aren't a problem to me. Rotting corpses in AoE Online (and by rotting I mean sudden change to bones and then disappearing lol) and fly corpses in AoE3 weren't really an issue to me.

in AOM, there was a spatter of blood that appeared and the body itself would slowly sink into the ground and disappear, leaving behind an impression of the body (kinda like a colored-in version of the chalk lines you see at crime scenes) which eventually fades out into a skeleton and disappears. it could perhaps be something ike this

Make the current "Hellenes" into another city-state, like Theban or Corinth. They were pretty prominent.

i still think that there should be just the two BC hellenic factions--the Macedonians and the Poleis/Hellenes--with the latter splitting into four major city-states: the Athenians, the Spartans, the Syracusans, and some other faction (whichever city-state was next-important after the first three, like the Thebans), with less-influential peoples being included as unimportant units, like the thracians that are already in the game, or as the "minor factions" that are being discussed elsewhere. then in part 2, just one other hellenic faction--the Byzantines--would be included

[oshron]

helleno-roman faction.

okay, a quote-unquote "hellenic" faction iirc, the byzantines were really just greeks who considered themselves romans, and were ethnically distinct from teh romans themselves. my point remains, though: i personally think that, in terms of representation for greece, there should be the Macedonians and Hellenic Poleis in part 1 and the Byzatines in part 2

now, speaking of part 1 and part 2, those two are going to be put together, right? so, for example, the BC period Macedonians could face off against AD period Huns, instead of being limited to only facing civilizations from their respective periods? because, as unhistorical as it is, i think it would be terrible if the BC civilizations couldnt fight the AD civilizations in random maps and user-made scenarios (as a note, it would also be useful for scenario design if, for example, you wanted to include just a random roman village in imperial rome, but wanted to make it look different from the big cities, so you could use the Pre-Imperial Roman civilization for the village and the Imperial Roman civilization for the city

[feneur]

now, speaking of part 1 and part 2, those two are going to be put together, right? so, for example, the BC period Macedonians could face off against AD period Huns, instead of being limited to only facing civilizations from their respective periods? because, as unhistorical as it is, i think it would be terrible if the BC civilizations couldnt fight the AD civilizations in random maps and user-made scenarios (as a note, it would also be useful for scenario design if, for example, you wanted to include just a random roman village in imperial rome, but wanted to make it look different from the big cities, so you could use the Pre-Imperial Roman civilization for the village and the Imperial Roman civilization for the city

Yup, this should all be possible eventually yeah

[Veridagorin]

will 0 AD have technology trees like in age of empires that you can view when you are choosing civ and in game?

[AuroN2]

If you chuck a look at the current tech tree status

They are basicly all the same, >.<

Tech is going to be by the looks of it much more unique than aoe, like you can only grab one, but its cumulative.

Like on a map with bnarely any ore but a tonload of trees, you'll get the lumberjack upgrade every time, then sell that for metals.

ETC ETC.

So it would be dificult to draw it up, though i imagine at a later stage there will be alot more tech unique to each faction.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also i would love to have cumulative repeatable "upgrades" that are temporary buffs

Like as romans you could decree a state of emergency, making infntry units (non elite) train faster and a bit cheaper, but have like 10 hp less per unit or something.

And the celts/gauls could have a raise warhost but it does the same instead it doesnt train faster and make them weaker, but it makes all gathering much slower

ETC ETC. #2

[historic_bruno]

i've seen this in battle realms , for example you can add movable rocks that can be pushed and throwed on the enemy's troups , specially when it comes to skirmish battles , or you can burn a forest (in a siege situation for example) , that king of things (infect a terrain to make it not suitable for farming , actually rome did this to carthage )

Oh, I don't think we'll do that. Terrain will mostly be for looks and pathfinding like it is now, the only exception I know is a possible "farmland" terrain which will enhance farming behavior. While you could have more player-terrain interaction I think it just adds complexity and not much to the gameplay on top of everything else.

will 0 AD have technology trees like in age of empires that you can view when you are choosing civ and in game?

Hopefully

[Alpha of the Eagles]

http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/657

Would it be possible to add a layer to the UI where you can toggle a button and show all merchant paths, rallypoints and paths for the gatherers in different color? Would be helpful for strategic placement of buildings.

[fricus-mazighen]

this is what i'm talking about

[Mythos_Ruler]

Looks like serious overkill.

[fricus-mazighen]

Looks like serious overkill.

if could be a great gameplay feature , don't you think ? xD

[Xanthus]

Could you please allow orders to be given while paused?

[Veridagorin]

Could you please allow orders to be given while paused?

i don't think that's a good idea because it will not work in multiplayer and if you are used to pausing it every time you need to multi task that will make a worse player and being able to order your units while paused will get rid of a little bit of the real time feel.

[Dread_Boy]

i don't think that's a good idea because it will not work in multiplayer and if you are used to pausing it every time you need to multi task that will make a worse player and being able to order your units while paused will get rid of a little bit of the real time feel.

This! I cannot more agree with you.