Thread for posting suggestions for Alpha 26

[bigaxd]

On 09/10/2021 at 7:38 PM, Langbart said:

Ptolemies have a Library.

Did you try the Han Chinese mod on GitHub? They have got a Government Center building.

yeah but those are only 2

it doesn't necessarily has to be a university or government building, but one more building to research civic techs

the celts for example could use a Tavern for example for those kind of researches

 

[Langbart]

2 hours ago, bigaxd said:

the celts for example could use a Tavern for example for those kind of researches

Yes, some civilization-specific structures have been removed from the game. Only way to get it back in is to make patches. 

• D3316 - [gameplay] deprecate gaul tavern (10/Jan/21)
• D2668 - [gameplay] deprecate rotary mill, introduce special gaul farming technology (25/Mar/20)

[Radiotraining]

maybe such building could host a few techs unique to the civilization?

Yeah, I'm still about this thread, and maybe this could be a compromise on giving special flavours to each civ, while maintaining the current symmetrical balance of units available.

So, for example, a civ can be specialized in building/engineering, so the "university" can have specific techs like less building time/extra resistance. Another can be specialized in aggressive warfare, another in improving the economy, another trading etcc..   (it doesn't have to be so mono-dimensional, a few tech may be common to others, but some can be unique).

Since the building can be available in a later stage, this can unlock some variation in the late game, while leaving space also to traditional strategies.

EDIT: ah, right! I remember there were some extra buildings..! Why have they been removed?

Edited October 12, 2021 by Radiotraining

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Tavern was thought to be apocryphal. Rotary Mill was thought to be inaccurate. 

Edit: Not by me, though. Lol

Edited October 12, 2021 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[bigaxd]

On 12/10/2021 at 5:29 PM, Langbart said:

Yes, some civilization-specific structures have been removed from the game. Only way to get it back in is to make patches. 

• D3316 - [gameplay] deprecate gaul tavern (10/Jan/21)
• D2668 - [gameplay] deprecate rotary mill, introduce special gaul farming technology (25/Mar/20)

really, removed?

they definitely need to be added back in, the models are beautiful too

I really hope you consider adding them back into the game

having Civilization specific buildings adds a lot to the gameplay experience

[Stan`]

1 hour ago, bigaxd said:

really, removed?

Yeah because of historical reasons. It was sad for me cause I made those.

[Lion.Kanzen]

11 hours ago, Stan` said:

Yeah because of historical reasons. It was sad for me cause I made those.

but they stay as eyecandy (?)

[maroder]

@Genava55 how historically inaccurate would it be to put the rotary mill back in for another civ?

Wikipedia leads me to believe that Carthage or Rome have used it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_mill#History

[Genava55]

26 minutes ago, maroder said:

@Genava55 how historically inaccurate would it be to put the rotary mill back in for another civ?

It has been removed for the Celts because they didn't use it but indeed, I see no issues for the Romans and the Carthaginians. We know that since the 2nd century BC, the Romans used it (called Mola Asinaria). Although it would be best to rename it "horse mill" instead of "rotary mill". It doesn't seem that the Greeks used it before the Roman Empire.

Edit: concerning the watermill, it seems that the oldest record suggest it cames from the Kingdom of Pontus (2nd/1st century BC)

Edited October 15, 2021 by Genava55

[bigaxd]

21 hours ago, Stan` said:

Yeah because of historical reasons. It was sad for me cause I made those.

the celts did however had Taverns, so I don't see why that should be removed too. Such a shame, they looked great

 

I hope they consider re-adding them

[chrstgtr]

10 hours ago, Genava55 said:

It has been removed for the Celts because they didn't use it but indeed, I see no issues for the Romans and the Carthaginians. We know that since the 2nd century BC, the Romans used it (called Mola Asinaria). Although it would be best to rename it "horse mill" instead of "rotary mill". It doesn't seem that the Greeks used it before the Roman Empire.

Edit: concerning the watermill, it seems that the oldest record suggest it cames from the Kingdom of Pontus (2nd/1st century BC)

Let’s just add it to romans. Combine it with the new proposed housing bonus for romans. And then we are back to having the brits/Gauls that everyone misses from a23

[Gurken Khan]

24 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

Let’s just add it to romans.

Do the Romans need a food/eco buff?

25 minutes ago, chrstgtr said:

Combine it with the new proposed housing bonus for romans. And then we are back to having the brits/Gauls that everyone misses from a23

Did you mean Celts instead of Romans?

[Yekaterina]

31 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

Do the Romans need a food/eco buff?

I think not. They have good eco and spear cavalry. 

If you really wish, you can give them a berry gathering upgrade. 

1 hour ago, chrstgtr said:

And then we are back to having the brits/Gauls that everyone misses from a23

That means brits and gauls will have to sleep in storehouses or farmsteads... probably not. If you want, we can make their wooden houses slightly cheaper for less durability. We can decrease cost of each house down to 60 wood and half the durability. 

[Old Roman]

It would be really nice to have the ability to save and load multiplayer configurations in match setup.

It's just a bit annoying that whenever I choose a new mod, the 8 player team and civ assignments disappear and revert to 2 unassigned players.

Is it because the default screen reverts to 'skirmish'?  Would changing the default screen to random preserve the multiplayer list?  

Other than that it's nice to see new and interesting mods again.

[Stan`]

Yeah it's some kind of failsafe to prevent ui breaking errors.

[Radiotraining]

Minimal suggestion: add a visual feedback for traders, once you establish a trading route from two markets.

It would be nice to have a line that shows their path once you click them. It's a small visual cue that reinforces the idea of a commercial traffic along that line. 

Also useful to know their route and where to defend with troops 

[Gurken Khan]

@Radiotraining I'm relying on the visual cue that is the tooltip at the cursor.

While I agree that a line would be nice I doubt that it would be possible, at least as accurate as you'd like it to be, since projected routes and actual routes often differ significantly. I don't know for what reason, but it can be seen when establishing a route from one market to another or when setting a rally point from a building to some resource.

[Radiotraining]

ah! well, obviously I have no idea of the technical aspect, just talking more from a user's perspective.

Yeah, I was thinking exactly something like the rally point visually, to give a general sense of the route (doesn't have to be so precise, only a visual indication). But is definitely not a top issue, if is not an easy update.

 

Edited October 31, 2021 by Radiotraining

[Gurken Khan]

@Radiotraining Just to make sure: you know that you can set a trading route from your market to another before the merchants come out, right?

You then will see a line for the trading route. Unfortunately it is not reliable; the line might indicate a route going behind your defenses, while in reality the traders will walk a route along the enemy's defenses... :/

[Dasaavawar]

Are two gendered citizens going to be added?

I was thinking that blacksmiths and markets could offer an small bonus if you garrison some citizens inside of them.

[Dasaavawar]

On 22/08/2021 at 2:29 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Han Chinese

With 'Random' civ, don't show civ until scouted

Better Scouting mod

Two-Gendered Citizens mod

And the UTILITY mod along with the no blood and no gore mod too. (And maybe some features from the BoonGui mod aswell).

[Gurken Khan]

I'd like to suggest to increase the visibility of buildings' self garrison indicators (or whatever the tt is).

I feel calling the status quo (1) 'subtle'  - at least for stables - would be an understatement, you kinda have to know that there should be an indicator and when looking for it you might find it; so I'm proposing something like (2), same position as CCs (if your CCs happen to have these indicators) and a longer and bolder line.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

15 minutes ago, Gurken Khan said:

I'd like to suggest to increase the visibility of buildings' self garrison indicators (or whatever the tt is).

I feel calling the status quo (1) 'subtle'  - at least for stables - would be an understatement, you kinda have to know that there should be an indicator and when looking for it you might find it; so I'm proposing something like (2), same position as CCs (if your CCs happen to have these indicators) and a longer and bolder line.

IIRC, in AOM it should show the rally point flag at the center of the building? 

[Fabius]

I have an idea to put forward. Currently we can put archers on walls, therefore what about allowing for bolt shooters to be placed on wall turrets? I recall catapult towers were briefly considered and dropped for being overpowered, but an artillery piece still exposed to counter artillery and ranged units seems more balanced.

That being said a possible issue could be close array of wall turrets to create a new incarnation of the A23 siege turtle. Rams and catapults would be a strong counter to this approach as well as the population cost. But I can think of possible situations were it could get really broken. Therefore as an alternative you could instead design an artillery turret that would be spaced in the same manner as towers currently and function as a wall turret might for archers garrisoned on top. 

The overall goal being more viable and interesting home defense.

[Loki1950]

The archers on the walls are a very good looking hack but a hack none the less putting any other unit on the walls/turrets just will not work ATM it would need some very tricky work on the game engine at a fairly low level as well as a complete refactoring of large sections of code all that would take about 6 to 8 months of work for at least two programmers,we just do not have those resources now.

Enjoy the Choice