Argalius Posted November 7, 2004 Report Share Posted November 7, 2004 On this site this is said:The game will be released in two parts: the first exploring B.C. and the second A.D.What is meant by that, that in the summer of 2006 only half the game will be released?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acumen Posted November 7, 2004 Report Share Posted November 7, 2004 No, it means that we plan for the game to have one or more expansion packs.The first edition will ship with six civilisations that peaked within the period of 500 B.C. to 1 B.C. (those civs are covered in the Cultures section elsewhere on the site, but they're the same ones you already know of).In the expansion(s), we plan to start to add A.D. civs to the mix (those that peaked in 1 A.D to 500 A.D.), as well as adding trickier backburner features that we didn't want to risk adding until we'd established a firm foundation and were comfortable with the engine's capabilities and our tools.Far back in the forgotten eras of 0 A.D.'s development, when it's design was still based on an AoK mod (where as you know the civs shared an extremely common base), we'd planned to release a game with almost double that number of civilisations. Splitting our efforts allows us to focus on a smaller number of civs at a time, and make them more detailed. Six is more than enough to do at once. Of course, that's a long-term plan, and we'll have to see if we first kill ourselves trying to complete the first objective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted November 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 7, 2004 Oh ok, but do you already have plans for the other civs because I can't really think of a civ that was there in 1-500 AD but not before BC. as well as adding trickier features that we didn't want to risk adding until we'd established a firm foundation and were comfortable with the engine's capabilities and our tools.I've read some of those things, but the one that (almost) schocked me was that there won't be any fishing in the game. Which I think is pretty strange in a RTS game (atleast for me ). I don't really get that why you aren't doing itTrue-scaled ships bring with them many issues that need to be tested, including whether they could feasibly fish narrow bodies of water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire Giant Posted November 7, 2004 Report Share Posted November 7, 2004 Oh ok, but do you already have plans for the other civs because I can't really think of a civ that was there in 1-500 AD but not before BC. Think of Imperial Rome, the Parthians, the Huns, the Dacians, for example Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted November 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 7, 2004 Think of Imperial Rome, the Parthians, the Huns, the Dacians, for example ←Isn't imperial Rome and the Romans before that almost the same?! The Parthians, I remember them from Parthian tactics in AoK Might be interesting.The Huns, hmm, not sure about them, how long did they last 50 years?! Not much info about them if I'm right. Only Attila, but then you have had most of it.The Dacians, never heard of. Maybe adding eastern civs to the game would be a nice adding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paal_101 Posted November 9, 2004 Report Share Posted November 9, 2004 In answer to your question, there was Republican Rome ruled by the consuls and the Senate, which was from the 6th century BC to the late 1st century BC. Then it became the Roman Empire after Octavian was made emperor. Two eras, two different armies. Plus there's possible talk of Late Empire Romans in Part II to confuse you even more Huns reeked havoc and were amazing fighters, gotta be in there. Dacians will be cool, for one thing they'll have one of the nastiest swords ever created Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted November 9, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 9, 2004 But still, Romans stay Romans. And I think it's better to do another one than make a second Roman civ ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurion_13 Posted November 9, 2004 Report Share Posted November 9, 2004 Also the roman military was quite different after the marian reform which is reasonably nicely demonstrated in rtw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Historicity Posted November 9, 2004 Report Share Posted November 9, 2004 The Dacians were a Germanic people found near modern day Romania. They may be represented as Celts considering the releasement of the "Celtic Empire" article found on the History Archive. It clearly states that the Celts (Gauls, Britons, Germans). Correct me if I am wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paal_101 Posted November 9, 2004 Report Share Posted November 9, 2004 Nope, the Celts will not be representing either the Germans (early Marcomanni/Cherusci types and later Goths/Franks etc) or the Dacians. At this moment the Dacians are looking to be an independent side, but Germans, both early and late, are still questionable. But nothing is for certain and we are focusing on Part I atm. As far as Romans go, yes they are the same civ but the Late Romans were very different from the earlier ones. In Part I there will be the Pre-Marian army, and without a doubt the Marian army will be in Part II, and possibly a post-4th century AD army. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Historicity Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 From what I've read on the internet as research for my own historical articles, as well as watching fun filled hours memorized by the History Channel, the late Germans were very influenced by the Roman army (as of 400 A.D. or sooner) they began to use Roman armor, weapons and tactics. "The sooner part" if I'm not mistaken began possibly around Julius Caesar's time, when the Gauls and Britons were finding out that their own equipment was no match for Roman iron. From what I can tell on the Celtic Concept art (unit wise) you guys plan on intrigrating some of that Roman feel into the Gauls, and Britons. This in my opinion, is what seperates you guys from say, professional gaming companies. You don't stick with one Unit skin, you incorporate several (hopefully at least).Congrats on the Great work, and website.And hurry up 2006!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire Giant Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 As far as Romans go, yes they are the same civ but the Late Romans were very different from the earlier ones. In Part I there will be the Pre-Marian army, and without a doubt the Marian army will be in Part II, and possibly a post-4th century AD army.←Exactly. The often imagined "Asterix"-legionaries with square shields and standardized armor and weapons are in fact the troops of the late republic and the empire, which came up after the Marian reforms which allowed poor plebejans (who could not pay for their own equipment) to enter military service as well. Before, the army was divided into the Velites, Hastatii, Pricipes and Triarii units (as shown in Rome - TW as well; though they are wrong with some details about the equipment in Rome). With these reforms, not only the whole army life and equipment changed, but also the tactics commanders used. We are trying to represent this dramatic change - which not only involves the army, but rather the whole society and government structures after the rise of Caesar and Augustus - by dividing the romans into two civilisations. Sure, it might look somewhat annoying if Republician Romans fight against Imperial Romans, but you can have such a conflict with all other civilisations as well (Iberians probably have never met Dacians in battle). The Imperial Romans will surely be played quite different from the Republician Romans, and with some other neat features we have decided to put back for Part II, we might be able to represent the Imperial Roman army as accurate as possible and give this civilisation the uniqueness it deserves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted November 10, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 Hmm, I still think it isn't a great idea, but ok. But when you do then please name the Roman civ Imperial Rome or whatever with the first release and don't change it after you've released part 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paal_101 Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 Actually that is already done, because the Part I Romans are officially Republican Romans, while we always refer to the classic Romans (see my avatar <--) as Imperial Romans in all of our internal discussions. Likewise Romans after 300 AD are referred to as Late Romans. Plus there are divisions within the respective eras as well For instance there is a difference between a Caesarean legionnaire and a Roman from the Dacian wars Needless to say, the Imperial Romans will probably be the best civ in the game in everything, period. *dances* Even their basic units won't be so basic lolAnd we are also trying to avoid the RTW clones look, we are going for significant randomization IAAP. BTW, HistoryGuy you should check out the vacancies section on the 0 AD site Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted November 10, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 Ok, then it's ok. But on the site it only says Romans though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeros Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 We don't want to confuse people with too many details. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paal_101 Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 Like I do Needless to say, it will all make sense when the game comes out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dnas Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 A few more details wouldn't hurt. 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.