Lion.Kanzen Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 11 minutes ago, Skhorn said: Perhaps this one Reveal hidden contents Here is the source https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=386330 What is displayed on your Emblem: A traditional Mongolian symbol known as the Xiongnu, with the Hanzi character meaning "Law" in the center of the sun.How does it symbolize your Nation: The flame on top represents eternal growth, success, and wealth. The three tongues of the fire represent past, present, and future. The Sun and Moon are representations of the eternal sky, as our nation shall also be eternal.When was your Emblem created: The Xiongnu's origin is possibly linked back all the way to the 3rd century BC. Its use in Galiagolach went back to the Galia Khaganate some time afterwards, and was considered the royal symbol of the empire. The Khan's Judges, a sect of the most elite soldiers who became judicial court officers in the Khan's court, used a variation with the Hanzi symbol for Law. After the fall of the Galia Khaganate, these elite forces of the law managed to go into hiding until they formed a strong enough force to bring the people back under their rule. They became the first khanate in the region to allow for a democratic election process in 1844, and the symbol has stuck ever since.Who designed your Emblem: The Xiongnu design is unknown, but the addition of the Hanzi can be traced back to High Court Marshal Essen Taishi in about 1620. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandermb Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 (edited) The problems with packing/unpacking system is that the unpack unit don't consider the area when unpacking and could cause some overlaping buildings/resources and the player using the xiongnu faction can steal territory influence and even unpack inside the allies/enemys territory so maybe i should remove any territory influence of the xiongnu and make them only neutral. Spoiler As for the big buildings (Double yurt buildings) i made another cart a bit bigger, but in any case only 1 cart couldn't carry all the resources needed for build again the barracks so i've made an empty versión of the barrack with only 1 yurt building and the other "under construction" with an upgrade system, so it makes more sense the cart can carry at least enough resources for build the 1st yurt and then the player rebuild the rest of the building for less cost as an upgrade Barrack Spoiler Empty Spoiler Cart Spoiler Edited November 27, 2017 by Alexandermb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Alexandermb said: The problems with packing/unpacking system is that the unpack unit don't consider the area when unpacking and could cause some overlaping buildings/resources and the player using the xiongnu faction can steal territory influence and even unpack inside the allies/enemys territory so maybe i should remove any territory influence of the xiongnu and make them only neutral. Interesting. @elexis Edited November 27, 2017 by Lion.Kanzen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandermb Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Disabling the Territory influence at least they won't steal allies/foes land yet, buildings can only be builded on own/neutral territory. Spoiler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandermb Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 As for the packed versión of every building i will reduce visión to 0 so in this case players won't be moving their houses everywhere alone whitout protection and behave like a nomad civilization protecting their settlements as an horde and maybe increase the loot for every packed building when killed so it won't be either beneficial for the xiongnu to lose their carts/wagons. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Pobrably best way is have an anti territory system, nomads give opposite effect and unconquerable territory bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 15 minutes ago, Alexandermb said: As for the packed versión of every building i will reduce visión to 0 so in this case players won't be moving their houses everywhere alone whitout protection and behave like a nomad civilization protecting their settlements as an horde and maybe increase the loot for every packed building when killed so it won't be either beneficial for the xiongnu to lose their carts/wagons. @wowgetoffyourcellphone is very wise with gameplay matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundiata Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 The Moon and Sun symbol are quite a good choice for civ-emblem, it's a recurring thing among the steppe people, and I've seen it a number of times on Xiongnu artefacts. The fire and the Chinese character should be omitted as they are more contemporary additions. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 I found this is very hunish but... I'm not sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 You can draw for me... or I will try? The gryphon (Pazirik) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elexis Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 10 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said: Interesting. @elexis The issue is that one can pack a civic center, move into the enemy territory, unpack it and thereby steal territory influence? Well. binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Upgrade.js has the upgrade code. I think it should be possible to test if the current location of the entity is within enemy territory and if so, just abort. (Still does't advertize this restriction in the GUI). But territory influence stealing would also be possible by unpacking in gaia territory near the enemy, then unpacking a second civic center in the gained territory then. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandermb Posted November 29, 2017 Report Share Posted November 29, 2017 thanks @elexis the "CheckPlacementRestrictions" worked at least for the territory unpacking in this case upgrade. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wowgetoffyourcellphone Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Ima just go a completely different route with these guys. No territory at all. Solves a lot of these weird territory issues while introducing a completely different play style for nomads. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted November 30, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 29 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said: Ima just go a completely different route with these guys. No territory at all. Solves a lot of these weird territory issues while introducing a completely different play style for nomads. Yes me too. very anachronistic solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandermb Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Those are the two choices to take to be or not to be: Upgrade system with territory restrictions when unpacking (own neutral). or just don't use territory influence and be totally nomads. like total war attila, (Huns) won't settle down they were always as an horde and they decresed food production maybe could use a big range aura in the chanyu's hall decresing resource gathering rate 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 (edited) Allowing in neutral territory without any restrictions doesnt seem wise as mentioned before. However, a certain area around the other players cc could be added as a restriction. (Similiar to what we currently have in not allowing two cc in close proximity.) making them without any territory influence might make them op early game. (towering the opponents resources etc.) This coud be ignored if buildings are weaker. The latter option seem more logical imo. Edited November 30, 2017 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted November 30, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 15 minutes ago, (-_-) said: Allowing in neutral territory without any restrictions doesnt seem wise as mentioned before. However, a certain area around the other players cc could be added as a restriction. (Similiar to what we currently have in not allowing two cc in close proximity.) making them without any territory influence might make them op early game. (towering the opponents resources etc.) This coud be ignored if buildings are weaker. The latter option seem more logical imo. No in delenda est Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandermb Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Any xion building don't attack so they have to rely only in their units so if you are moving your CC near the enemy you better be prepared or you are risking everything is not a walking fortress they have. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted November 30, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 6 hours ago, Alexandermb said: Any xion building don't attack so they have to rely only in their units so if you are moving your CC near the enemy you better be prepared or you are risking everything is not a walking fortress they have. That sounds funny.to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandermb Posted December 1, 2017 Report Share Posted December 1, 2017 On 11/10/2017 at 11:13 AM, Alexandermb said: i've made the champion cavalry both spearmen/archer (upgrade system) considering the image has both spear and quiver/bow. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundiata Posted December 1, 2017 Report Share Posted December 1, 2017 21 hours ago, Alexandermb said: Any xion building don't attack so they have to rely only in their units so if you are moving your CC near the enemy you better be prepared or you are risking everything is not a walking fortress they have. I think this is a good idea, and sounds really interesting (and fun). It makes sense from a nomadic perspective and the fact that they don't have any defensive structures like towers or fortresses further mitigates any overpowered advantages created by this play-style. A TRUE nomad civ, how exciting... I'll be captain obvious and state that this thread can serve as the framework for the nomadic Scythians as well. Scythians as the Western Steppe-people, Xiongnu as the Eastern Steppe people: the ancient the Silk Road is complete... @Lion.Kanzen, I just noticed, the title of this thread should be "Minifaction: Nomads Xiongnu" (you're missing an "n") Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted December 1, 2017 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2017 37 minutes ago, Sundiata said: I think this is a good idea, and sounds really interesting (and fun). It makes sense from a nomadic perspective and the fact that they don't have any defensive structures like towers or fortresses further mitigates any overpowered advantages created by this play-style. A TRUE nomad civ, how exciting... I'll be captain obvious and state that this thread can serve as the framework for the nomadic Scythians as well. Scythians as the Western Steppe-people, Xiongnu as the Eastern Steppe people: the ancient the Silk Road is complete... @Lion.Kanzen, I just noticed, the title of this thread should be "Minifaction: Nomads Xiongnu" (you're missing an "n") UPS I didn't notice The other N. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lion.Kanzen Posted December 1, 2017 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2017 Fixed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundiata Posted December 1, 2017 Report Share Posted December 1, 2017 Hsiung-nu is another way of spelling Xiongnu, which makes it a little easier to understand how to pronounce it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandermb Posted December 1, 2017 Report Share Posted December 1, 2017 most of the things are done, now its just fix the templates for the alpha 23 and add the civ bonusses with the alpha stables, also should Modu Chanyu be added as a hero (cavalry)? History: Spoiler Modu, Modun, or Maodun (simplified Chinese: 冒顿单于; traditional Chinese: 冒頓單于; pinyin: Màodùn Chányú; Mongolian: Модунь, Modun; Баатар, Baatar; c. 234 – c. 174 BC) was the fourth known Xiongnu ruler[1] and the founder of the Xiongnu Empire. He became the Xiongnu ruler after he ordered the execution of his father Touman in 209 BC. (Wikipedia)https://arrecaballo.es/edad-antigua/los-hunos/los-xiongnu/ Spoiler 2 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.