sphyrth Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 Okay, so it's established that multiple Unit Classes have benefits from the side of the developer and/or modder. But I think that the Foot Companions and Egyptian Pikemen should not have the Spear class in addition to Pike class. But what do you guys think? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wowgetoffyourcellphone Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 It's mainly for techs and attack bonus that they have both. But it would be relatively simple to adjust 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nescio Posted August 31, 2019 Share Posted August 31, 2019 You're right, Pikemen shouldn't have the Spearman class. I've included it in D1815 months ago. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sphyrth Posted September 1, 2019 Author Share Posted September 1, 2019 17 hours ago, Nescio said: You're right, Pikemen shouldn't have the Spearman class. I've included it in D1815 months ago. That's a nice patch. I'm kind of on the Fence about the lengthened words, though. I'm torn between Saving Space (Spear) and Clarity (Spearman). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nescio Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 6 hours ago, sphyrth said: That's a nice patch. I'm kind of on the Fence about the lengthened words, though. I'm torn between Saving Space (Spear) and Clarity (Spearman). What matters to me most is consistency; we already have Archer and Maceman, not Bow and Mace. Moreover, I believe having matching file names, generic names, and classes (e.g. `template_unit_cavalry_melee_swordsman` has Unit, Cavalry, Melee, and Swordsman classes and “Cavalry Swordsman” generic name) reduces the likelihood of minor mistakes. 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.