Civilizations and Cultures: A roadmap

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Delenda Est will add approximately 60 civilizations (lol) to the game 0 A.D. all based on 14 culture group in the Eastern Hemisphere between 500 BC and AD 500. It's my hope that the cultures UI mod can get working again to help make the culture groupings a real. Each civ will have its bonus and penalty as well as each culture will have its bonus and penalty. A civ can be in more than 1 culture group, giving the attributes, bonuses and weaknesses of each culture group it is in.

GUI

Something like this, but with drop-down list for cultures.

Final civilization list with all modded civs, original civs, and the Han from Rise of the East:

Africans

Common Attributes: African war elephants, strong land trading

Carthaginians

• Extra-strong walls

Garamantines

Kushites

Mauritanians

Numidians

Ptolemies

Balkans

Common Attributes: Skirmishing bonuses, good sword infantry, high attack, low armor

Dacians

Illyrians

Thracians

Celts

Common Attributes: Weak buildings, fast construction, fast-moving units, Rotary Mill

Batavians

Britons

Celt-Iberians

Galatians

Gauls

Chinese

Common Attributes: Massed infantry, population bonus, use of fire, crossbows

Han

Egyptians

Common Attributes: Temple and healer bonuses, strong expensive tier 2+ buildings, free tier 1 buildings, mercenaries train instantly

Ptolemies

Germans

Common Attributes: Capturing bonuses, "Ambush" attack bonus within forests, shield wall, high attack, low armor, ox cart dropsite, weak wooden buildings

Batavians

• Extra-strong cavalry

Franks

• Throwing axemen

Goths

• Can branch/choose between Ostrogoths and Visigoths at Imperial Phase

Teutones

Hellenes

Common Attributes: Theater (Hellenization bonus), technology cost bonus, strong sea trade, strong spearmen

Athenians

• Naval bonuses

Epirotes

• Can train small number of war elephant

Macedonians

• Extra-strong heroes
• Can train small number of war elephant

Magna Grecians

Pergamenes

Rhodians

• Naval bonuses

Spartans

• Syssition building to train hoplites and Spartiates
• Strong female citizens

Syracusans

• Gastraphetes ("belly-bow") siege unit
• Mercenaries cheaper

Thebans

• Sacred Band infantry
• Siege Workshop building
• "Fire Raiser" siege unit

Iberians

Common Attributes: Free circuit of walls at start, "Ambush" attack bonus within forests, monument, flaming pitch, strong fortress

Celt-Iberians

Iberians

Lusitanians

Indians

Common Attributes: Armored war elephants, population bonus, good archery

Guptas

Indo-Greeks

Mauryans

• Wooden city walls; the others have stone city walls

Iranians

Common Attributes: Infantry train very fast but weak, good cavalry, strong land trading, Palace

Achaemenids

• Population bonus
• Immortals at palace
• Can train a small number of unarmored war elephtan

Parthians

• Extra-strong cataphract
• No elephants

Sassanids

• Extra-strong cataphract
• Can train armored war elephants

Italians

Common Attributes: Good melee infantry, good siege equipment

Etruscans

Magna Grecians

Dominate Romans (4th - 6th centuries AD)

• Base on Eastern Roman Empire: from Constantine to Belisarius
• Extra strong wall upgrades
• Frontier Barracks train front-line troops (Limitanei) from neutral territory
• Barracks train Comitatenses troops
• Foederati trained from merc camps
• Architecture based on Orthodox-Greek and Constantinople

Principate Romans (1st - 2nd centuries AD)

• Unique citizen/slave economy
• Build Triumphal Arch to unlock phase upgrades
• Army Camp
• Temple of Vesta
• Siege Walls

Republican Romans (3rd - 2nd centuries BC)

Samnites

Nomads

Common Attributes: Movable buildings, less restrictive territory concept, good cavalry, raiding and looting bonuses, no stone walls (except for Parthians)

Huns

Parthians

• The only civ in Nomad culture to have stone walls

Sarmatians

Scythians

Punics

Common Attributes: Champions trained at temple, mercenary concept is flipped, strong sea trade and navy

Carthaginians

• Extra-strong Naval Shipyard

Successors

Common Attributes: Pike infantry, Library, siege tower

Epirotes

• Small number of war elephant

Greco-Bactrians

• Cataphract

Indo-Greeks

Macedonians

Pergamenes

Ptolemies

• Lighthouse

Pontians

Seleucids

• Cataphract
• Scythe Chariot
• Armored Elephants

Edited October 25, 2015 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Lion.Kanzen]

you will made...

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

you will made...

Much stuff can be re-used across same culture (especially buildings!)

Edited October 25, 2015 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Lion.Kanzen]

wow, I want.... I want.... is my vision about 0AD MOD based in iron. I want ... I want to help you.

[Lion.Kanzen]

60 Civs or 60 Factions?

[Giotto]

Holy **** sounds amazing. Aren't you concerned that balancing will be impossible with all that different stuff?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

60 Civs or 60 Factions?

60 civs spread over 14 culture

Holy **** sounds amazing. Aren't you concerned that balancing will be impossible with all that different stuff?

Not concerned. On basic level they all use the same units. A spearman in one civ have same function as a spearman in another civ. Most of the differences are a matter of degree. Though, some civ have a few major differences, just use math to see how the major differences stack up. Example: Can use math to see how Principate Romans citizens + slaves econ combo stack up against Republican Romans female citizens + citizen-soldier econ combo. But in most civs a female citizen is just a female citizen and a slinger is just a slinger. Most civs will have access to most unit types, either from barracks or from the mercenary camps. Look at balancing as part of the fun. Plus with so many civ there will be so many variation that not 1 civ can dominate all others, there will likely be a half dozen other civ with good combos that can take down the dominate one.

I also do not feel all civ need to be equally balance. I am fine with having underdog civs and dominate civs. More of a challenge to win with an underdog civ.

Eventually, with player input/polls and win-loss statistic it can be determine which civ are powerful and which are weak. Can add new sorting tags based on this, "Dominant Civs Only" or "Barbarian Civs Only" or whatever which I think could be very cool.

Edited October 25, 2015 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Lion.Kanzen]

Holy **** sounds amazing. Aren't you concerned that balancing will be impossible with all that different stuff?

there are many way even not balancing at all. AoK don't look very balanced. many times I can't take down a player or an Ai because they have cavalry armored civilization and me a archer and weak Infantry (Mayans vs Slavs) for example.

[DarcReaver]

There's no point to have 60 civs where the only difference is stuff like "Infantry unit X can only have 2 hack armour instead of 3" and "this faction has 20% more town center radius", especially if even the graphics are the same for most. Just go with less civs, give the main civ certain bonuses and modify them within the sub factions (if there are some). And then FINISH those factions, make an interesting gameplay for each and you're set.

More is not always better.

Edited October 25, 2015 by DarcReaver

[Lion.Kanzen]

my idea about mini and sub faction, I don't know if you read that system, because you need heroes and marvels for each faction.

[DarcReaver]

my idea about mini and sub faction, I don't know if you read that system, because you need heroes and marvels for each faction.

Sub factions are fine - but you really don't need hundreds of sub factions. If you make so many different factions it's too hard and confusing for people to learn the game. Less is better. If you make the difference very small there's no real point in making sub factions in the first place.

The idea behind different factions/civs is that you get differing gameplay patterns. So, better have 4 civs which drastically differ in playstyle than have 20 civs who play the same.

If you want to make "sub/mini factions" just go the way by making them skins for the existing civs with no differences in gameplay.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

I did not say there would be no differences in gameplay. In AOK there are minor difference between civ and yet the civs play very different from each other. The game now have 20+ civ.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Sub factions are fine - but you really don't need hundreds of sub factions. If you make so many different factions it's too hard and confusing for people to learn the game. Less is better. If you make the difference very small there's no real point in making sub factions in the first place.

The idea behind different factions/civs is that you get differing gameplay patterns. So, better have 4 civs which drastically differ in playstyle than have 20 civs who play the same.

If you want to make "sub/mini factions" just go the way by making them skins for the existing civs with no differences in gameplay.

call down, this no is Starcraft or other rts where you have very difference between factions. If Justus wants little variation between them to have a great list, is their decision. Look AOE HD + Forgotten + African Kingdoms Its a lots of Civs.

I have a question you have evidence, you know something like a poll or marketing research, how you are sure?

I'm sure I create a survey about 0AD. And they , the target ( people) ever ask from new factions.

[DarcReaver]

call down, this no is Starcraft or other rts where you have very difference between factions. If Justus wants little variation between them to have a great list, is their decision. Look AOE HD + Forgotten + African Kingdoms Its a lots of Civs.

I have a question you have evidence, you know something like a poll or marketing research, how you are sure?

I'm sure I create a survey about 0AD. And they , the target ( people) ever ask from new factions.

AoE HD has a stable community because the game is fame from its name. If it wasn't Age of Empires the game would be dead by now. Anyways.

If you ask people if they want more content they surely will say "sure I want". That's not an argument really. It's like this: if you have 60 civs, of which like 20 only have 1-2 different technologies or smth, all you get is: those 20 civs will play out 99% the same. So why bother to create a faction for them? Just make some skins for the units and it's done if someone really wants unit XY to look like AZ instead.

60 civs is just nonesense imo. If you make those 60 civs differ more (which I doubt is even possible) it makes the learning curve much harder (you need to learn about 60 different factions, I doubt anyone would bother learning them. Also, out of those 60 civs you'll get probably a top 5, or maybe 8 of civs which are (most) useful in multiplayer and will be played, because they're easiest to learn, or most powerful if used right etc.

Nobody plays AoF seriously. If you look at the player base, almost all lobbies are AoC lobbies with no AoF content allowed (which I find very dissappointing since I like Slavs a lot). The new additions to the game are mostly considered imbalanced or unnecessary. Just look at the steam forums, or that AoC community page (http://aoczone.net/). Quite a lot of AoF bashing in there. I sort of find it amusing because it's not THAT bad, but still, some posts have a point here and there.

Which is getting back to my original point. More content =/= better game. Just face it. If the game itself is unfinished/unfun it doesn't matter if it comes with 2,5,10 or 60 civs, because it won't be played anyways. It's just even more unnecessary work. Also, if all civs play out the same more or less you attract only one player audience. If you have different types of civs (read: civs which do not play 99% the same) you have the chance to attract more people.

Edit: don't get me wrong, having options ingame is a good thing of course! But just don't overdo it. Instead of having 60 civs consider just creating like ... idk .. maybe 4 main factions (like greek, germanic tribes/"barbarians", romanians etc) with some sub factions for each or some of them, making a total of like 15 civs or so. Larger differences between the main factions, and sub faction making them specialized in something. I really wouldn't recommend splitting those main factions into 10 sub/mini factions each. Better make a few less and make them feel more unique instead.

Edited October 25, 2015 by DarcReaver

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

I am not creating game, I'm creating mod. I don't care about "new players who will have to learn everything." Tell Rome:Total War player and modder that they should only have 4 civs. lol

I think you can see how well I have done with Principate Romans. Once I make new hero textures I move onto something new. German civs maybe to give the Principate Romans proper historic nemesis.

Edited October 25, 2015 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[DarcReaver]

I am not creating game, I'm creating mod. I don't care about "new players who will have to learn everything." Tell Rome:Total War player and modder that they should only have 4 civs. lol

I think you can see how well I have done with Principate Romans. Once I make new hero textures I move onto something new. German civs maybe to give the Principate Romans proper historic nemesis.

Total War does exactly what I described above. You have main civs and sub civs. And all those main civs play out differently. the sub civs give certain smaller bonuses which works for singleplayer games.

In multiplayer the civs do not matter that much. Unit composition is more important. So this is not really comparable.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Total War does exactly what I described above. You have main civs and sub civs. And all those main civs play out differently. the sub civs give certain smaller bonuses which works for singleplayer games.

In multiplayer the civs do not matter that much. Unit composition is more important. So this is not really comparable.

This post show you the "main civ" is the culture. All of the "civs" are subciv with customizations. I also propose a GUI that make this forefront.

You choose the Culture which have attribute, then you choose a civ in that culture that is tweak to your liking. Could go farther make it so that player can choose "Africans" for instance and then the game randomize a African civ for the player when game launch. Or choose "Hellenes" and the game randomize and give the player a random Greek civ. (of course the player can choose specific civ if player wants, without question).

Africans

Common Attributes: African war elephants, strong land trading

Carthaginians

• Extra-strong walls

Garamantines

Kushites

Mauritanians

Numidians

Ptolemies

Balkans

Common Attributes: Skirmishing bonuses, good sword infantry, high attack, low armor

Dacians

Illyrians

Thracians

Celts

Common Attributes: Weak buildings, fast construction, fast-moving units, Rotary Mill

Batavians

Britons

Celt-Iberians

Galatians

Gauls

Chinese

Common Attributes: Massed infantry, population bonus, use of fire, crossbows

Han

Egyptians

Common Attributes: Temple and healer bonuses, strong expensive tier 2+ buildings, free tier 1 buildings, mercenaries train instantly

Ptolemies

Germans

Common Attributes: Capturing bonuses, "Ambush" attack bonus within forests, shield wall, high attack, low armor, ox cart dropsite, weak wooden buildings

Batavians

• Extra-strong cavalry

Franks

• Throwing axemen

Goths

• Can branch/choose between Ostrogoths and Visigoths at Imperial Phase

Teutones

Hellenes

Common Attributes: Theater (Hellenization bonus), technology cost bonus, strong sea trade, strong spearmen

Athenians

• Naval bonuses

Epirotes

• Can train small number of war elephant

Macedonians

• Extra-strong heroes
• Can train small number of war elephant

Magna Grecians

Pergamenes

Rhodians

• Naval bonuses

Spartans

• Syssition building to train hoplites and Spartiates
• Strong female citizens

Syracusans

• Gastraphetes ("belly-bow") siege unit
• Mercenaries cheaper

Thebans

• Sacred Band infantry
• Siege Workshop building
• "Fire Raiser" siege unit

Iberians

Common Attributes: Free circuit of walls at start, "Ambush" attack bonus within forests, monument, flaming pitch, strong fortress

Celt-Iberians

Iberians

Lusitanians

Indians

Common Attributes: Armored war elephants, population bonus, good archery

Guptas

Indo-Greeks

Mauryans

• Wooden city walls; the others have stone city walls

Iranians

Common Attributes: Infantry train very fast but weak, good cavalry, strong land trading, Palace

Achaemenids

• Population bonus
• Immortals at palace
• Can train a small number of unarmored war elephtan

Parthians

• Extra-strong cataphract
• No elephants

Sassanids

• Extra-strong cataphract
• Can train armored war elephants

Italians

Common Attributes: Good melee infantry, good siege equipment

Etruscans

Magna Grecians

Dominate Romans (4th - 6th centuries AD)

• Base on Eastern Roman Empire: from Constantine to Belisarius
• Extra strong wall upgrades
• Frontier Barracks train front-line troops (Limitanei) from neutral territory
• Barracks train Comitatenses troops
• Foederati trained from merc camps
• Architecture based on Orthodox-Greek and Constantinople

Principate Romans (1st - 2nd centuries AD)

• Unique citizen/slave economy
• Build Triumphal Arch to unlock phase upgrades
• Army Camp
• Temple of Vesta
• Siege Walls

Republican Romans (3rd - 2nd centuries BC)

Samnites

Nomads

Common Attributes: Movable buildings, less restrictive territory concept, good cavalry, raiding and looting bonuses, no stone walls (except for Parthians)

Huns

Parthians

• The only civ in Nomad culture to have stone walls

Sarmatians

Scythians

Punics

Common Attributes: Champions trained at temple, mercenary concept is flipped, strong sea trade and navy

Carthaginians

• Extra-strong Naval Shipyard

Successors

Common Attributes: Pike infantry, Library, siege tower

Epirotes

• Small number of war elephant

Greco-Bactrians

• Cataphract

Indo-Greeks

Macedonians

Pergamenes

Ptolemies

• Lighthouse

Pontians

Seleucids

• Cataphract
• Scythe Chariot
• Armored Elephants

Edited October 25, 2015 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Giotto]

I think between 4-8 main cultures would be good with 2-3 separate civs in each. More than that will make the game too complicated. Don't get me wrong I love the idea of having lots of different civs but there is a limit to how unique you can make them without more strategic capability. At the moment there is just not enough content in the game to make loads of unique civs. If you can get definite differences between the cultures im all for having loads of civs, it just seems hard to do. Even in the current version of 0ad the civs are not that different from eachother, making more factions under that seems very hard. Make the cultures really different and then make individual civs under that. People will mainly use the culture for their strategic approach.

But still go for it!

Edited October 25, 2015 by Giotto

[Lion.Kanzen]

And Late republican Romans? the time of Julius Caesar, Pompey, Marius, Anthony, Agrippa, Crassus.

[JC (naval supremacist)]

Its interesting to notice on the Seleucid Shield the moon and the star : similar to Turkish flag.

I wonder what represent the symbol in the middle

[Stan`]

An anchor ?