Sacred places / Sites [ Gaia - Neutral stuff]

[Lion.Kanzen]

https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/sacred-sites/173977/4

 

I think that is the idea that I liked the most about the design of AoE IV.

" you capture them and if you keep all of them long enough you win". 

In AoE IV mechanic

clear, the developers have explicitly said that one victory condition they've experimented with is sacred site victory where a player must control all sacred sites to win. At various points in the fan event footage you can see control of the sacred sites listed as a victory condition, and here you can see that controlling all sacred sites starts a ~5 minute timer. Weirdly in that shot there's only one sacred site to control. In this footage from the most recent event you can see that there's 3 sacred sites in the middle of the map shown -- their icon is a circle with a cross in the middle. The minimap isn't fully explored so there could be more. Its plausible that they have some additional purpose beyond being a victory condition but we don't have any hints of that being the case.

In 0 A.D.

in our game they could be places of natural as well as cultural worship.

[Dasaavawar]

Well, many sacred places are rebuilt and used as the actual Wonders. I can only think of ruins, megaliths and burial mounds.

[Lion.Kanzen]

27 minutes ago, Dasaavawar said:

Well, many sacred places are rebuilt and used as the actual Wonders. I can only think of ruins, megaliths and burial mounds.

I want something smaller than a temple. something in nature.

A small shrine, smaller than a monument.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Check out the shrines in DE. 

[Lion.Kanzen]

35 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Check out the shrines in DE. 

I have a long time not to update my folder DE.

[Dasaavawar]

The first pic looks like something in the British Islands or Northern Europe.

Probably you will find this interesting; a Celtic burial mound:

https://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/12/24/the-hochdorf-chieftains-grave-intact-and-richly-furnished-grave-of-an-early-celtic-chieftain/

[Ceres]

It could also be something small as bones and stuff hung in some trees (if discernable enough), could it? Or one larger tree that is special on its own; same for a larger rock/ monolith?

Should these places have some capabilities like healing wounded units or increasing attack within a certain perimeter?

[Radiotraining]

On 11/10/2021 at 11:49 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

At various points in the fan event footage you can see control of the sacred sites listed as a victory condition, and here you can see that controlling all sacred sites starts a ~5 minute timer. Weirdly in that shot there's only one sacred site to control. In this footage from the most recent event you can see that there's 3 sacred sites in the middle of the map shown -- their icon is a circle with a cross in the middle. The minimap isn't fully explored so there could be more. Its plausible that they have some additional purpose beyond being a victory condition but we don't have any hints of that being the case.

 

 

From the sneak peek I've seen I confirm that's the format: 3 sacred sites in each map to conquer, similar in concept with CoH capture points. Is an alternative to the wonder, or in AOE terms, when you capture all reliquiaes of the map and starts the countdown to victory. 

I also thought it was an interesting variation in the gameplay but I was wary to not propose something similar for 0ad, to not make it look like an AoE rip-off. 

Beside this, I think is possible to draw also a useful lesson from this concept: how to make the map more playable and interactive? 

I think DE works well in this sense, introducing more Gaia elements and mercenary camps. AOE also have conquerable markets in the map that can be used to trade.

I think that having some mid-objectives to conquer and hold in the map, could maybe lead to some interesting situations in the gameplay: something like a bridge on some chokepoints, the already mentioned markets, or some fortresses/fortified outposts in the map that can be conquered. 

What do y'all think? 

- sacred sites however are pretty rad

EDIT: an idea could be that some sites, if conquered, can generate resources (like reliquaes on AOE), so taking them could be decisive for a strategy and maybe prevent too much turtling? 

Edited October 13, 2021 by Radiotraining

[Dakara]

Why not an option like relic but not in all game plz  

[alre]

 

2 minutes ago, Dakara said:

Why not an option like relic but not in all game plz  

well that we have already.

[Lion.Kanzen]

13 hours ago, Ceres said:

It could also be something small as bones and stuff hung in some trees (if discernable enough), could it? Or one larger tree that is special on its own; same for a larger rock/ monolith?

Should these places have some capabilities like healing wounded units or increasing attack within a certain perimeter?

They might have different bonuses.

2 hours ago, Dakara said:

Why not an option like relic but not in all game plz  

It is a game mode, like Relic mode.

[Lion.Kanzen]

By the way this is in the art forum, for now it is conceptual.

 

We are discussing small things. How it looks like , aesthetic, They will be small sanctuaries and more beautiful than the one in AoE IV [Beta].

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

23 hours ago, Radiotraining said:

EDIT: an idea could be that some sites, if conquered, can generate resources (like reliquaes on AOE), so taking them could be decisive for a strategy and maybe prevent too much turtling? 

I don't think "too much turtling" is a problem with this game.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

23 hours ago, Radiotraining said:

I think DE works well in this sense, introducing more Gaia elements and mercenary camps. AOE also have conquerable markets in the map that can be used to trade.

 

Yeah, the game needs more interactive map elements. 

[Radiotraining]

5 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

I don't think "too much turtling" is a problem with this game.

yeah, that's fair, I haven't played that much the latest version, so I was probably stuck a few releases behind

Anyway I was just shuffling a couple of ideas/variables from the concept of interactive sites on the map, but I defer to you guys for a deeper knowledge of the game.

I apologize to Lion.Kanzen for having maybe misused this space that was more meant for references and concept visualization. Sorry for chiming in

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

29 minutes ago, Radiotraining said:

yeah, that's fair, I haven't played that much the latest version, so I was probably stuck a few releases behind

Anyway I was just shuffling a couple of ideas/variables from the concept of interactive sites on the map, but I defer to you guys for a deeper knowledge of the game.

You're okay. I think "control point" victories are fine, as long as they're a game setup option (and not on by default). "Shrines" could still have a gameplay effect (in DE they could trickle glory, for example), even if the control point victory is not enabled by the host.  

 

32 minutes ago, Radiotraining said:

I apologize to Lion.Kanzen for having maybe misused this space that was more meant for references and concept visualization. Sorry for chiming in

I think biomes could have different "shrine" models. Sahara and Nubia biome shrines could be based on the current Ptolemaic temple actor. Those actors are based on sacred complex "kiosks" anyway, not actual temples. In an Italian map, the shrine would be based on the Temple of Vesta. In a Greek map, I think the shrine would look like the Temple of Athena Nike or the "Athenian Treasury" at Delphi.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

On 11/10/2021 at 2:49 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

most about the design of AoE IV

I think it is ok to have this condition, but it is good that they can only be captured by monks, but cancelled by any enemy unit who kills the monks. It makes map control a little more important when there are so many resource generation mechanics in AoE4 that otherwise would not require you to have much map control. By far the worst victory condition is landmark victory, where a player just builds trebuchets and snipes the enemy landmarks (which can sometimes be only 3-4 buildings) faster than the enemy can repair them. I watched SOTL play a AoE4 4v4 and he was winning but then was eliminated because he did not notice his landmarks were being destroyed. 

My favorite features of AoE4 are the garrisonable and upgradeable walls and upgradeable castles. Another cool thing is the weapon based unit upgrades and melee unit charging. To me it is so strange that they made all of these nice realism/gameplay improvement features but then decided to make all projectiles a 100% hit probability, I feel that it is wasting all of the effort they put into the other features in the game to make projectiles so comedically simple. Without accuracy/ projectile simulation, ranged units are just melee units with long attack range, like extremely long pikes that just do a small amount of damage.

Some people argue that inaccuracy is RNG, but in my opinion this is fine because the outcome is still controllable by the player. I argue that there is much less skill in knowing exactly how long your scout can spend under a TC before dying, rather than a skill-based intuition made up of your estimate of your enemies' accuracy upgrades/willingness to garrison to increase arrows/how much of the TC you need to see/how much of a threat you want your scout to be. Another example is if you have a knight looking to kill vills and it encounters X amount of archers, you can't run away because you know X amount of archers will one-shot your knight, so you just look away and accept the knight is dead even before the archers shoot. The inaccuracy does not have to be as extreme as AoE2, but it should at least be present in game.

 

[Lion.Kanzen]

3 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Me gusta mucho. I like that.

 

 

I hate that maps in 500 BC are empty it's like the land without humans 

[Lion.Kanzen]

2 hours ago, BreakfastBurrito_007 said:

I think it is ok to have this condition, but it is good that they can only be captured by monks, but cancelled by any enemy unit who kills the monks. It makes map control a little more important when there are so many resource generation mechanics in AoE4 that otherwise would not require you to have much map control. By far the worst victory condition is landmark victory, where a player just builds trebuchets and snipes the enemy landmarks (which can sometimes be only 3-4 buildings) faster than the enemy can repair them. I watched SOTL play a AoE4 4v4 and he was winning but then was eliminated because he did not notice his landmarks were being destroyed. 

My favorite features of AoE4 are the garrisonable and upgradeable walls and upgradeable castles. Another cool thing is the weapon based unit upgrades and melee unit charging. To me it is so strange that they made all of these nice realism/gameplay improvement features but then decided to make all projectiles a 100% hit probability, I feel that it is wasting all of the effort they put into the other features in the game to make projectiles so comedically simple. Without accuracy/ projectile simulation, ranged units are just melee units with long attack range, like extremely long pikes that just do a small amount of damage.

Some people argue that inaccuracy is RNG, but in my opinion this is fine because the outcome is still controllable by the player. I argue that there is much less skill in knowing exactly how long your scout can spend under a TC before dying, rather than a skill-based intuition made up of your estimate of your enemies' accuracy upgrades/willingness to garrison to increase arrows/how much of the TC you need to see/how much of a threat you want your scout to be. Another example is if you have a knight looking to kill vills and it encounters X amount of archers, you can't run away because you know X amount of archers will one-shot your knight, so you just look away and accept the knight is dead even before the archers shoot. The inaccuracy does not have to be as extreme as AoE2, but it should at least be present in game.

 

We will see how to adapt it as with the relics.

How I said this is in the art forum. Over there I will open one for this gameplay in due time.

[Lion.Kanzen]

3 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

You're okay. I think "control point" victories are fine, as long as they're a game setup option (and not on by default). "Shrines" could still have a gameplay effect (in DE they could trickle glory, for example), even if the control point victory is not enabled by the host.  

 

I think biomes could have different "shrine" models. Sahara and Nubia biome shrines could be based on the current Ptolemaic temple actor. Those actors are based on sacred complex "kiosks" anyway, not actual temples. In an Italian map, the shrine would be based on the Temple of Vesta. In a Greek map, I think the shrine would look like the Temple of Athena Nike or the "Athenian Treasury" at Delphi.

I would change the scale a bit, embassy type, it depends on the map.

[Gurken Khan]

1 hour ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Me gusta mucho. I like that.

Wouldn't the cultures' buildings be intact at the peak of their might?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

1 hour ago, Gurken Khan said:

Wouldn't the cultures' buildings be intact at the peak of their might?

Could have Mycenaean/Minoan ruins for Greek maps. Assyrian ruins for Middle Eastern maps. Etc.

[Gurken Khan]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Could have Mycenaean/Minoan ruins for Greek maps. Assyrian ruins for Middle Eastern maps. Etc.

I was wondering if any of our civs would consider ruins of old and dead civs as sacred. Whatever works, I guess.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

4 hours ago, Gurken Khan said:

I was wondering if any of our civs would consider ruins of old and dead civs as sacred. Whatever works, I guess.

I guess the point is the gameplay element. One could rationalize it in any way necessary. lol