0 A.D. - The Grand Vision

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Looking at all of these cool mods. Aristeia: Bronze Age, Millennium A.D.: Middle Ages, Terra Magna: Classical Age civs from across the world, and of course my Delenda Est. I am struck with a grand vision for 0 A.D. which could be spectacular.

 

0 A.D. Epochs

 

Imagine, if you will, a 0 A.D. which spans the breadth of the entire pre-modern age. It's already happening with some very high quality mods, but what if eventually it could be made official? What would happen is that during game setup, the host (or single player) with a check mark system could select the different eras or "epochs" from which civilizations can be chosen. The host could choose only Classical epoch for an historical match, and then players could only choose the civs (like Athenians vs. Achaemenid Persians) with the Classical designation (in the civ.json file for modders and devs), or the host could choose multiple different epochs, allowing for some interesting ahistorical matchups which span across time (New Kingdom Egypt vs. Ptolemaic Egypt for example).

Some civs would span multiple epochs (Rome, Egypt, India, Nubia, China all easily spring to mind), with epoch-specificities (the "Late Antiquity" Romans would be different from the "Classical" Romans who would be different from the "Medieval", ie "Byzantine", Romans course). While other civs, like the Thracians, would be relegated to only 1 epoch. In this way each epoch will have its own unique civs, while you can see a pattern of historical change with the long-running civs like the Romans across epochs.

0 A.D. Epochs could be truly epic in this way.

 

How to implement it.

Each Epoch can be added separately, in different subsequent releases when the civs of that epoch or mod become acceptably complete. Let's say the current "Empires Ascendant" roster becomes the core group of civs for the "Classical" epoch. Once Terra Magna is close to complete, its civs can be divvied up according to historical relevance. The Han could be added to the "Classical" epoch, while the Zapotecs can be added to the new "Late Antiquity" epoch. Likewise, Delenda Est's Principate Romans can be added to the "Late Antiquity" epoch along with any new "Part 2" civs, like the Sassanid Persians, Huns, Visigoths, et al. Just debut a new epoch with at least 3 new complete civs for some variety. New civs can be added later, perhaps one or two per alpha/beta release.

What would be needed from the dev team is the UI code to allow this and then choosing when a mod civ is complete enough to add to the official Epochs roster.

 

The Potential Epochs and Civs (for dreaming)

Bronze Age

• Babylonians
• Egyptians (New Kingdom)
• Hallstatt Culture
• Hittites
• Minoans
• Mycenaeans
• Nubians (Kerma)
• Phoenicians
• Sea Peoples
• Hebrews
• Trojans
• Others

Classical Age

• The current Empires Ascendant roster.
• Chinese (Han)
• Parthians
• Nabataeans
• Scythians
• Thracians
• Xiongnu
• Others

Late Antiquity

• Romans (Principate; Trajan, Hadrian, et al.)
• Chinese (Jin Empire)
• Germanics
  • Visigoths
  • Marcomanni
  • Vandals
  • etc.
• Persians (Sassanids)
• Garamantes
• Huns
• Indians (Guptas)
• Japanese (Yamato)
• Zapotecs
• Others

Medieval

• Anglo-Saxons
• Arabs
• Byzantine Romans
• Bulgarians
• Franks (Carolingians)
• Chinese (Tang Dynasty)
• Indians (Cholas)
• Mayans
• Mongols
• Norse ("Vikings")
• Ottoman Turks
• Poles
• Crusader Kingdoms
• Others

Could maybe expand into the Renaissance, with the Aztecs, English, Incas, Spanish, French, Mughal Indians, Ming Chinese, wealthy African kingdoms, etc. Gunpowder wasn't overpowered yet. Still had lots of melee and heavy cavalry. 

Any actual roster doesn't have to be nearly this extensive at first. It can start small and get added to as modders add the civs they would most enjoy working on. It's completely doable, as modders will want to keep adding civs to the game for many years. The dev team can curate and make sure the civs don't get too crazy and unbalanced, but the large part of the work is done by modders. 

Edited September 11, 2018 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Nescio]

Your suggestion reminds me of Empire Earth.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

4 minutes ago, Nescio said:

Your suggestion reminds me of Empire Earth.

I had thought of this too, but crucially you aren't advancing the civ through the ages in a single match; the gameplay still focuses a civ onto a specific era and aesthetic.

[sphyrth]

Face it, wow. You're the only one who can create a vision, and implement it. I just doubt that your age will be friendly to you at this point.

[Guest]

To be honest, 0AD needs someone who decides on gameplay as a whole. Lets face it, there isnt a direction now. But thankfully, the amount of bugs and stuff means theres still stuff to do. But there isnt any major changes, features or mechanics planned. Maybe thats ok, maybe all that was planned is accomplished. However, personally I dont like something that doesnt evolve with time.

[Stan`]

20 minutes ago, (-_-) said:

But there isnt any major changes, features or mechanics planned. Maybe thats ok, maybe all that was planned is accomplished. However, personally I dont like something that doesnt evolve with time.

Actually the fact that it isn't planned isn't true. There is work being made on a design document to help us tackle features and mechanics. It is being worked on by @Itms and @Prodigal Son behind the scenes.

[macemen]

I think, if accurately implemented, this would create intrinsic imbalances in the game. Late medieval plate armor, for example, is clearly superior to a bronze-age armor and so are the medieval steel weapons. On the other hand if this is not reflected in the game then the differences between civilizations stay purely aesthetic, especially within the same civilization (e.g. Republican Roman vs. Byzantines).

[Sundiata]

1 hour ago, macemen said:

this would create intrinsic imbalances in the game.

Only when choosing to mix epochs...

 

6 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

0 A.D. Epochs

Looove it!

[macemen]

12 minutes ago, Sundiata said:

Only when choosing to mix epochs...

If one doesn't mix the epochs then I don't see the point over separate mods for each epoch, except perhaps for convenience.

I can also see the fun value of pitching civilizations from wildly different eras against each other in SP. Don't see how it would work in MP though, as no one would want to play a civilization doomed to loose.

[Nescio]

Including a large number of civilizations but separating them into epochs sounds rather arbitrary for me. For instance, the Early Middle Ages have a lot more in common with Late Antiquity than with the Late Middle Ages. Of course, one could subdivide them into shorter epochs, but then you'd also have more cut-offs of factions which belong in multiple groupings. Besides, these epochs are heavily eurocentric. Furthermore, some might prefer geographic groupings (e.g. only Indian civilizations, but none from Europe or elsewhere) rather than chronological ones.

A more sensible approach would be to put all factions into separate downloadable mods (one civ, one mod), giving people the freedom to decide for themselves which ones they want to install and use. It would complicate multiplayer a bit, though, because players have to have the same mods active to be able to join a game.

[destro]

umm...Ottoman truk?? swords against gunpowder??

[Lion.Kanzen]

I'm not fan of Mycenaean Greece vs Byzantine late Empire, that sounds like Civilization or Empire Earth.

[Imarok]

This could as well be implemented as some kind of meta-mod, that has all the other civ-mods (aristeia, millennium, etc.) as dependency.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

On 9/11/2018 at 10:45 AM, Nescio said:

Including a large number of civilizations but separating them into epochs sounds rather arbitrary for me. For instance, the Early Middle Ages have a lot more in common with Late Antiquity than with the Late Middle Ages.

This isn't an academic paper. A game designer has to make concrete choices and these involve compromises to make the concept work. 

 

On 9/13/2018 at 3:46 AM, Imarok said:

This could as well be implemented as some kind of meta-mod, that has all the other civ-mods (aristeia, millennium, etc.) as dependency.

Essentially, yeah, that could work. I was just thinking that it could be the "official" game though since most of the mods are made either by WFG members themselves or by active forummers. Either way could work.

 

Furthermore, some might prefer geographic groupings (e.g. only Indian civilizations, but none from Europe or elsewhere) rather than chronological ones.

That could be cool too. In the past I have pushed for more meta to be added to the civ.jsons so that the host can create interesting gameplay situations for their match, similar to what you suggest here.

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Wesley]

@Sundiata @Lion.Kanzen

I've been looking at the Garamantes. There is not much to go on.
Only 5 small cities in central and west Libya. No monuments with faces on it.
Desert Mounted and Chariot based raiders. Raiding out of oasis' and Sahara lakes that were drying up.
To save their oasis' they dug foggara or Qanat, deep underground canals. That could be their wonder. The technology also occurs in Persia, Afghanistan, South American deserts but the Sahara has the longest Qanat systems.  

One other thing makes them distinct, they domesticated the eland and bred a draft animal, possibly the giant eland (Taurotragus derbianus). Its not found in Libya today but there are reports and pictures of eland drawn carts and chariots. 
 

Houses are mostly mud brick or simple stone. They seem to have provision for nomadic tents in the city edge. Open areas walled off from the afternoon sun and hot winds. 
Crops: wheat, barley, dates. Could we make a field with palms along one edge? Have it yield food and a small bit of wood. 
The lakes had crude docks, boats, big fish and one lake cluster in the Sahara had whales! (over in Egypt) The bulk of the lakes dried up at the end of the ice age but some were still there in 0 AD, brackish I suspect. All are gone now becoming salt pans and sand filled depressions. 
 

As the sahara dried out the sand covered almost everything. You can stand on a city and not know it. Most useful new archaeology is discovered thanks to satellite imagery and sand penetrating radar. 
The Roman writings talk of people, barbarians as the Romans called them, living in caves and being raided by the Garamantes. They also mix that up with Garamantes in the caves. 

This mix of things makes me think we could do a build with mud and stone buildings mixed with walled tent compounds and underground shelter marked by stairs and ramps disappearing into the ground. Monuments including a great Qanat or a desert lake. A very limited dock making only fishing and trade boats. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garamantes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qanat

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_eland
The whales are in Egypt.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadi_El_Hitan

Edited February 18, 2019 by Wesley

[Sundiata]

@Wesley, the Garamantes are actually on my personal shortlist for another African civilization. References would be tremendously challenging though. But not impossible...

We start talking about Garamantes and start sharing references from the 10th message in this thread:

 

 

They were actually first suggested back in 2011:

 

9 hours ago, Wesley said:

Only 5 small cities in central and west Libya.

There's a lot more than 5 small cities. At least 8 important towns/cities and over a hundred fortress settlements! Probably hundreds of more smaller and/or as of yet undiscovered/unexcavated settlements... There was even a Roman style bath house and Hellenistic influenced cut stone temple in Germa as well as elaborate monumental tombs with Hellenistic/Coastal North African influences. And they were fully literate as well! https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/11/111111-sahara-libya-lost-civilization-science-satellites/ 

 

9 hours ago, Wesley said:

One other thing makes them distinct, they domesticated the eland and bred a draft animal, possibly the giant eland (Taurotragus derbianus). Its not found in Libya today but there are reports and pictures of eland drawn carts and chariots. 

I'm not sure where you got that from? African Elands did indeed exist and were hunted by Saharan people, but I've never seen anything about domestication, let alone it being used as a draft animal. Perhaps a misinterpretation of crude cave paintings of horse drawn chariots? 

 

9 hours ago, Wesley said:

The lakes had crude docks, boats, big fish and one lake cluster in the Sahara had whales! (over in Egypt) The bulk of the lakes dried up at the end of the ice age but some were still there in 0 AD, brackish I suspect. All are gone now becoming salt pans and sand filled depressions. 

There were indeed still a few lakes so they should be able to fish, maybe transport troops, but not much more than that.

But the whales date to more than 40 million years ago... It's a little bit beyond our timeframe  

 

9 hours ago, Wesley said:

As the sahara dried out the sand covered almost everything. You can stand on a city and not know it. Most useful new archaeology is discovered thanks to satellite imagery and sand penetrating radar

Exactly... Are you familiar with Dhar Tichitt (and Dhar Walata and Dhar Nema) in the West African Sahara? More than 500 stone settlements dating from c. 2000 BC to 300 BC. Early agro-pastoralists. They were ancestral to the Soninke people, who later went on the found the Ghana Empire (modern day Mali/Mauritania) in the early medieval period. 

 

 

[Wesley]

Now that's that's answer I need. You need psychic powers to find the projects in the search engine. lol.  Lets see what boss lion has for me. 

The eland thing is a New Scientist paper and a Scientific American paper. Something about genetics; a marker common in domesticates that's rare in never domesticated species. Years ago. The western plains zoo in Australia has a small herd and a plaque mentioning it. That's what put me onto the papers.
Several miniatures game company's have done eland chariots. The animal is easily tamed.

https://hiveminer.com/Tags/cart%2Ckenya

[Sundiata]

51 minutes ago, Wesley said:

The eland thing is a New Scientist paper and a Scientific American paper. Something about genetics; a marker common in domesticates that's rare in never domesticated species. Years ago. The western plains zoo in Australia has a small herd and a plaque mentioning it. That's what put me onto the papers.
Several miniatures game company's have done eland chariots. The animal is easily tamed.

How interesting... Are you sure those papers weren't about Southern African elands? We really can't add something like that without proper primary sources. 

But they do seem to be quite docile indeed...

 

54 minutes ago, Wesley said:

https://hiveminer.com/Tags/cart%2Ckenya

I only see donkeys there... Donkeys were widespread in the Sahara. I think they even originate from there.

 

 

[elexis]

We have no lack of people who want to decide on gameplay as a whole.

The gamedesign plans where one doesn't know which individuals will implement them, doesn't how they can be implemented, doesn't know when they will be implemented by the envisioned individuals are doomed to remain pipedreams. The plan usually put forward by gamedesign proposals is that someone invents a fun game concept, and then Wildfire Games is supposed to implement that. The reality is that Wildfire Games is not a company, doesn't have any employees. The people that have worked on 0 A.D. and pyrogenesis at a time, throughout the soon two decades of existence one way or another were countable on one or two hands. When they worked on it, they worked on it in their spare time. In contrast, some commercial companies that provide comparable "triple A" RTS games may spend millions on hundreds of employees. What a single person can accomplish in their free time is very small, in particular when every possible alternative proposal by players shall be taken into account. S, to be honest, what 0 A.D. needs is more people who are capable and available for years to work on 0 A.D as a whole, so that they can decide on 0 A.D. as a whole and then implement 0 A.D. as a whole. Gameplans that decide on 0 A.D. as a whole without being able to plan an implementation with our current technical C++/JS implementation is not able to estimate the amount of work that is needed for that plan, not able to demonstrate the feasibility of 'the whole'.

So it should be

Quote

To be honest, 0AD needs someone who decides on gameplay as a whole and then implements that.

I'm pointing this out because if we only get "someone who decides on gameplay as a whole" without the proof of concept, we might actually worsen the situation for 0 A.D. as a whole, because it removes the freedom of the contributors to plan what they will implement. They are degraded from the developer to the programmer.

I do get that the point that is often brought about is that developers can keep adding random stuff if they didn't subscribe to a common vision. But it seems rather that this is due to the absence of experience with the game and existing game concepts (implemented and not implemented), rather than the lack of "a person who decides on the game as a whole".

(Also notice that Wildfire Games as a whole should decide on 0 A.D. as a whole in an ideal world (i.e. no time and effort cost to gain knowledge and take decisions and no possibility of mistakes due to partial knowledge).)

On 9/11/2018 at 10:20 AM, (-_-) said:

But thankfully, the amount of bugs and stuff means theres still stuff to do

But that's reversed. If we didn't had to spend past and future years on defects (and too long or sometimes emotional discussions on minor details), we could instead spend (and have had spent) our time on implementing new features and mechanics and revisioning the game.

On 9/11/2018 at 10:20 AM, (-_-) said:

But there isnt any major changes, features or mechanics planned

Depends on whether "planned" means "scheduled" and what threshold one defines for "major", because we have several lifetimes of plans on trac issues, in the old design documents, in forum threads. And I guess everyone has desires and imagination of the potential 0 A.D. could become, but fails to develop them (both figuratively and literally) because of the reallife constraints (the time it takes to implement it).

I can provide a recent example. From August 2017 to February 2018 I worked merely on fixing bugs of the rmgen codebase. There was no space for any imagination, because there were just defects in the code that consumed months to rework. While doing so I gained a lot more knowledge on the gamedesign background, what the authors of these maps and map library methods (Spahbod, matei, Mythos Ruler, FeXoR) had in mind (or at least published) at the time of authorship. After most of the defects were gone and after months of time to think about the essence of that codebase, I gained the freedom to envision and implement the Kushite mapscripts, 'as a whole'.

Exchange the program folder worked on, and we get the same storyline that we would need for someone who will work on formations/batallions, or a history mode, or as in this thread, many news civs.

I elaborated on this because (a) it has potential for damage if put into action as is (spending time and effort on possibly unrealizable project ideas), (b) the same is stated by others in other threads, (c) there are no hypotheticals or conditions in that statement.

On 9/11/2018 at 10:20 AM, (-_-) said:

However, personally I dont like something that doesnt evolve with time. 

I agree.

On 9/11/2018 at 8:46 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Epochs

On topic, it would be great to have many more civs, but they should IMO be part of separate games that use the same pyrogenesis engine. Like the 0ad mod for civs between 500 bc and 0 ad, the 500ad mod for the civs between 0 and 500ad, and so forth. Then if someone wants to go bananas and do extremely ahistoric fights, they can launch the games as mods simultaneously. 0 A.D. has the claimed purpose to inform players of the history of each civilization. So there should be a historical campaign for each these civilizations that should be more fascinating visual entertainment than any movie or documentary while the player gains the knowledge without any efforts to blindly learn it, like in school. At least that's what I would spend my time on before spending equal amount of time adding more civs. (Though I still think that the celtic tribes that aren't britons and aren't gauls, north of rome are missing if we want to implement the early history of rome in a campaign.)

[Wesley]

I will see if I can find it. The eland are all the same species with the north, east and southern ones and the giant ones being able to breed. At least in captivity.  That's bad for the rare ones. The zoo I know of had no normal eland specifically to keep the rare ones pure blood.

P.S. I'm looking at doing a bison for the game. They have the same pure breeding problem with cattle. There are no pure wisent bison in Europe. They Scythian faction.     

I better go to bed or all be here all night. lol. 

Edited February 18, 2019 by Wesley

[Guest]

You can try something only to backtrack and redo what someone else did a few years back. It doesn’t even have to be broken. The people who wrote that would have had a different vision/idea/plan. Unless one person can go all the way, that’s most likely how it would be.

The people who wrote the code for rmgen did what seemed most sensible for them at the time. With time, issues were found and fixed. A couple years down the road, it’s not unlikely who ever picks up from where you left off does the same thing. Kinda feel like taking one step forward only to take two steps backward.

[Wesley]

On 9/11/2018 at 11:08 PM, Sundiata said:

Only when choosing to mix epochs...

 

Looove it!

If you can't mix epochs then you really can't balance things. If the Romans smash the Scoti because the Scoti are mostly stone age then that is historically correct. 
If the Scoti smash the Romans easily then something needs to be checked but its a really low priority. 

However if the Roman are facing the The Divided Kingdom Judahites then what your really doing is Barabbas in 30 AD or the Jewish wars of 68-70 AD. If your facing the Archaic Hellenes then your really dealing with a non Athenian greek island faction that's rebelled. Both the Aristeia armies are under powered and under equipped because historically in 0AD +/- 500 rebel groups be they jewish, greek or something are under powered.  

The other problem is the geographic separation. Romans meeting Celts good. Romans meeting Chinese bad! Only if your a fanatical historian but most of us are fanatical historians. The simple solution is already in play; regionalize the game. A drop down menu with:
Mediterranean Classical->  (Base 0AD)
Mediterranean with rebels (Main game with Aristeia as rebels) ->
Asian with Han, Xiongnu, adding Scythian, Mauryas and maybe the Persians because we have records of them all fighting. ->
New world with Zapotec and what ever comes up to fight them. ->
Medieval; (Millennium A.D.) with the Hun as a reskinned Scythian/ Xiongnu.
Anything goes (kiss your play balance and historical accuracy goodbye) ->:

Can those ponies beat the Romans? 

Edited February 19, 2019 by Wesley

[Guest]

Romans meeting Chinese isn’t more unlikely than Mauryans meeting Britons. Geographical proximity isn’t that big of a deal. I mean, there are already situtations where Ptolemic Egyptians fight Mauryas in the Arctic.

Time frames does seem like a valid reason for epochs.

[Trinketos]

I think the Mayans are contemporaries with the Greeks

[Sundiata]

27 minutes ago, Trinketos said:

I think the Mayans are contemporaries with the Greeks

They are indeed... The rise of the Mayans begins just after the collapse of Mycenaean Greece, but predates the advent of the archaic period, at 1000 BC, and continues into the classical and Hellenistic periods... Monumental architectures starts around 500BC in the mid-Pre Classic period, the classic period starts around 250 AD and continues to 900 AD. But the last independent Maya city didn't fall until 1697! They have a loooong history...

@Wesley You also have to keep in mind that all the civilizations currently in vanilla are interconnected. They might not all have faced each other in battle, but at least they all sort of knew about each other and traded either directly, or indirectly. Romans and Chinese for example knew about each other, if only vaguely. 

Edited February 19, 2019 by Sundiata