About civilizations pre- and post- 0AD

[franzliszzt]

Don't you think its much more awesome if a day, little by little, we'll see many other of them? I dont' mean in mods, but in the main and "real" game.

add from my answer below:

If the point is to respect history, it should be done properly. Khushites have never fought gaulls, for example. But they're both included in this game. If you want to be "historic" you won't create a scenario with both of them (right?). You won't even use khush or ptol in artic regions. But you actually can do it.
Maybe you should totally change the layout. Choose a region first, then civ, then the rest. Battle in Asia--> maur-->etc, africa-->ptol-->etc.

 

Edited May 29, 2018 by franzliszzt

[elexis]

Not sure which civilizations you consider, but I'm sure they were invaded by rome.

[franzliszzt]

*much more edit.

 

Hi,

I don't care about particular civilizations. I just mean to add other ones.
But I saw something in those "mods"... and well, that's very sad. Because you have to stick to the name 0ad, a potential slice of the game is totally wasted. So you can't add pre and post civ., just because they're far from time range you're considering... I understand the point, but I still consider this quite dumb. I don't mean to judgw or insult of course, I'm saying that be so pedantic seems very unintelligent to me. It was better to choose another name then!
I hope at least other civ. will be available apart, with the possibility to add them into the game. It is possible with warcraf 3 for example... why not with a totally open source game?
I really like this game, and it's a pity to delete a priori any other civilizations you can make just for that reason

 

anyway japan and chinese ones were already there in 0ad

Edited May 29, 2018 by franzliszzt

[Stan`]

Hello and welcome to the forums.

The reason we "stick" to this time frame is to be able to properly depict history. If you start adding the XIX century English to a mod about antiquity, that's retarded. Even if you make Britons evolve to that. How much history are you gonna skip ? There are already 13 civs, while it was decided 12 was enough so there is still hope for new civilizations in that time frame.

I'm also gonna say we are open source, our art is open source, we are not paid for this, and we do this on our free time, mods included.

Also a part II is planned when part I is finished, and part II will cover 0 - 500 AD.
 

4 minutes ago, franzliszzt said:

But I saw something in those "mods"... and well, that's very sad.

I have no clue what you are trying to say here. However Terra_Magna adds Zapotecs, Xiongnu, and the Han Dynasty to the game. A version will hopefully made available soon.
If you wanna go medieval, just look at Millenium AD that covers roughly 500 - 1100.

If you make your own mods, you can add as many civs in the game as you want.
 

[franzliszzt]

Hello and thanks,

I really understand the point, but I still don't share it. anyway, yes, I need to understand how to mod myself... I'd help with pleasure, but I'm not able in programming
I didn't know about part 2. Can you please link a page?

-But I saw something in those "mods"-

I meant different civ., like chinese.

thanks

(I know you're not payed and the reason behind open source)

[Stan`]

1 minute ago, franzliszzt said:

I really understand the point, but I still don't share it. anyway, yes, I need to understand how to mod myself... I'd help with pleasure, but I'm not able in programming
I didn't know about part 2. Can you please link a page?

Part II will only start when we are done with Part I, so no page.
 

1 minute ago, franzliszzt said:

-But I saw something in those "mods"-

I meant different civ., like chinese.

https://www.moddb.com/mods/rote

[franzliszzt]

aaahhh darn I mispelled the title.. , even if you understood what I mean...
be free to change it as you want

Edited May 29, 2018 by franzliszzt

[Loki1950]

29 minutes ago, franzliszzt said:

aaahhh darn I mispelled the title.. , even if you understood what I mean...
be free to change it as you want

You can edit all of your own posts including the titles the moderators try to really avoid that as is makes the community appear as a dictatorship

Enjoy the Choice

[franzliszzt]

Another thing.

If the point is to respect history, it should be done properly. Khushites have never fought gaulls, for example. But they're both included in this game. If you want to be "historic" you won't create a scenario with both of them (right?). You won't even use khush or ptol in artic regions. But you actually can do it.
Maybe you should totally change the layout. Choose a region first, then civ, then the rest. Battle in Asia--> maur-->etc, africa-->ptol-->etc.

[franzliszzt]

5 minutes ago, Loki1950 said:

You can edit all of your own posts including the titles the moderators try to really avoid that as is makes the community appear as a dictatorship

Enjoy the Choice

hahaha ok

 

Edited May 29, 2018 by franzliszzt

[Sundiata]

0AD is a historic game, and the only one of its kind that spends so much attention on historical details, which is amazing in itself, and greatly appreciated by many who can't find this level of historicity in other classic RTS games. The general idea is to stick to what is known about the 500BC to 1AD timeframe. Most of the civilization in this timeframe (and there are many) were inter-connected with each other, if not by war, then by trade, culture and art...

Just to show how far flung these ancient connection went: Galatian mercenaries served in Ptolemaic armies, so Kushites may well have faced Celts in battle, its not as far-fetched as you may think... There were Greeks living in Meroë... Galatian mercenaries also served in Seleucid armies and may well have faced armies of the Maurya Empire. Carthaginians allied with Celts and Iberians and Indian mahouts served in the armies of the Seleucids, Ptolemies and perhaps even the Carthaginians, or trained local mahouts, and Indians were also present on the East African coast and even Anatolia.. Numidian cavalry from North Africa was used by Trajan in his conquest of Dacia (Romania), Greek colonists from Phocaea (Turkey) founded the Greek city Empuries in Iberia... 

Long story short: All the civs in-game knew all of the other civs in at least some capacity, and often traded or warred with each other, or even served side by side as mercenaries in foreign armies (think of Indians, Kushites, Egyptians, Greeks, Thracians, Assyrians and others, in the Persian armies of Xerxes, fighting Athenians, Spartans, Corinthians etc... during the Persian invasion of Greece). The level of interconnectedness in antiquity is often overlooked, or misunderstood... But its absolutely delicious once you start seeing it. The ancient world, from Britannia to China was a giant interconnected network of trade routes, that were often fought over by mercenaries from all over "the known world"...

Adding, say, Genghis Khan to this mix, or Montezuma would totally break the immersion, while throwing 15 years of attempted historicity through the window...

You can also set matches up yourself so you can go for purely historical map/civ combo or do your own thing (especially with mods, its totally up to you)... I'd agree that a more flexible timeframe would benefit 0AD, and more (historical) civs are always welcomed by myself (especially the Eastern ones), but anything outside of Iron Age Antiquity would totally spoil one 0AD's greatest selling points.

Edited May 29, 2018 by Sundiata

[Lion.Kanzen]

3 hours ago, franzliszzt said:

Another thing.

If the point is to respect history, it should be done properly. Khushites have never fought gaulls, for example. But they're both included in this game. If you want to be "historic" you won't create a scenario with both of them (right?). You won't even use khush or ptol in artic regions. But you actually can do it.
Maybe you should totally change the layout. Choose a region first, then civ, then the rest. Battle in Asia--> maur-->etc, africa-->ptol-->etc.