Fixing Chinese Han

[AIEND]

8 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

 

这些事情是可以做到的。

• 小米领域可能需要等待，因为它需要更多的艺术。
• 我可以移除骑兵弩手，没问题。
• 让战车骑士成为 弓箭手 而不是弩手。
• 本周早些时候我已经移除了练习场，所以不用担心。
• 移除“连发弩”科技。 我一直都知道这是不合时宜的。 也许是 Forge 的一种不同的特殊技术？ “差速淬火”？  

 

 

我想看看冠军剑客的一些理由。 现在，这个单位看起来很酷。 这些是我们现在拥有的：

 

  隐藏内容

 

There are some small problems
1. The shields of the Han army, like the Romans, can only be worn by grasping a handle with the hand, and cannot be worn on the arm. So Lancers don't need shields.
2. The long swords of the Han Dynasty are generally of a ceremonial nature. People will not wear such cumbersome weapons to fight. It is recommended to replace them with Ji.
3. Chinese soldiers do not use greaves on their calves. That's a laborious lever that makes it harder to lift your leg and walk.
4. The helmet is not suitable. I have posted some pictures of cultural relics here, which can be used as art reference.

https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/71601-task-han-hero-elite-helmets/#comment-481742

Edited February 26, 2022 by AIEND

[AIEND]

In addition, I will check the professional books on the color of the armor and the smelting technology of the Han Dynasty that can be used as a faction feature.

[Yekaterina]

I don't understand why do we have to make firing interval 3 seconds??! This is bad! Even though the damage per shot is high and overall DPS is high, in that 3 seconds many of your soldiers could have been killed while the enemy isn't hurt at all! Too long repeat time is bad, especially for champions! We should increase the firing rate to 1 shot per second at a lower value. 

Crossbows were superior to bows for higher firing rate, so it should be even faster-firing, for example 750ms. But we lower the damage per shot!

[AIEND]

10分钟前，叶卡捷琳娜说：

我不明白为什么我们必须将触发间隔设为 3 秒？？！ 这是不好的！ 即使每次射击的伤害很高，整体 DPS 也很高，但在那 3 秒内，你的许多士兵可能已经被杀死，而敌人根本没有受伤！ 太长的重复时间是不好的，尤其是对于冠军！ 我们应该以较低的值将射击速率提高到每秒 1 发。 

弩比弓具有更高的射速，因此它应该更快，例如 750 毫秒。 但是我们降低了每次射击的伤害！

This is unreasonable, Chinese crossbows are not faster to reload than bows, but generally more accurate, arrows fly faster, and have a longer range. I also don't recommend a 3 second interval, maybe 1.5 seconds is more appropriate.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

8 hours ago, AIEND said:

This is unreasonable, Chinese crossbows are not faster to reload than bows, but generally more accurate, arrows fly faster, and have a longer range. I also don't recommend a 3 second interval, maybe 1.5 seconds is more appropriate.

I am thinking 2 seconds and then the training tech can reduce it to 1.5. Deal?

[real_tabasco_sauce]

9 hours ago, Yekaterina said:

Crossbows were superior to bows for higher firing rate, so it should be even faster-firing, for example 750ms. But we lower the damage per shot!

Well if they are the repeating crossbow, i think this model is fine!

I also like how they are in the changeset.

Edited February 26, 2022 by real_tabasco_sauce

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

If the Han did not have repeating crossbows, then we can't have the tech.

Without the repeater mechanism and magazine, a crossbow is not faster than a bow. It's easier to operate. Easier to train on, etc. That's why I wanted them to be trash units.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

22 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Without the repeater mechanism and magazine, a crossbow is not faster than a bow. It's easier to operate. Easier to train on, etc. That's why I wanted them to be trash units.

Right. So the cost is 50 food 40 wood?

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

2 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Right. So the cost is 50 food 40 wood?

Trash units should be a bit less IMHO. But 0 a.d. has the citizen soldier complications as well.

[AIEND]

4 小时前，wowgetoffyourcellphone 说：

我在想 2 秒，然后训练技术可以将其降低到 1.5。 交易？

You mean increasing the rate of fire of crossbowmen from recruits to elites? It starts with an interval of 2 seconds, then 1.75 seconds, and finally 1.5 seconds. Provides a technique in P2 that makes crossbowmen a veteran as soon as they come out.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Trash units should be a bit less IMHO. But 0 a.d. has the citizen soldier complications as well.

Yeah, i'm not sure how successful a trash unit (like in AOE2) would be in 0ad. In @LetswaveaBook's mod's mod, persian skirms train for cheaper, train faster, and do less damage.

I'm certainly fine with crossbows being cheaper like this, but their strength should mirror their cost, keeping in mind upgrades they receive. Perhaps something like "repeating crossbows" or "crossbow regiment" or whatever unique damage upgrade they end up receiving in p2 (p3?) should bring their cost to 50f 40w 10m, the same cost profile as a sword and remove the -10% health?

^this upgrade would probably need to have a more substantial cost associated with it.

Edited February 27, 2022 by real_tabasco_sauce

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

On 25/02/2022 at 8:54 PM, AIEND said:

There are some small problems
1. The shields of the Han army, like the Romans, can only be worn by grasping a handle with the hand, and cannot be worn on the arm. So Lancers don't need shields.
2. The long swords of the Han Dynasty are generally of a ceremonial nature. People will not wear such cumbersome weapons to fight. It is recommended to replace them with Ji.
3. Chinese soldiers do not use greaves on their calves. That's a laborious lever that makes it harder to lift your leg and walk.
4. The helmet is not suitable. I have posted some pictures of cultural relics here, which can be used as art reference.

https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/71601-task-han-hero-elite-helmets/#comment-481742

1. I can remove the shield from the champion cavalry very easily. I can also give them "cataphract" animations. 

• I will say the Roman cavalry used shields, so are not a good example.  Imperial Roman cavalry even used large oval shields, not just small round shields. 

2. My justification for giving them a ceremonial long sword is because they are supposed to be "palace guards." If we can justify it, I wish we can keep the longswords.

3. I don't think any units have greaves. What some of them have are lamellar scales. 

4. I made a post in that thread that may help us decide which helmets go with which textures.

 

[AIEND]

20 分钟前，wowgetoffyourcellphone 说：

1.我可以很容易地从冠军骑兵身上取下盾牌。 我也可以给他们“cataphract”动画。 

• 我会说罗马骑兵使用盾牌，所以不是一个很好的例子。 罗马帝国骑兵甚至使用大型椭圆形盾牌，而不仅仅是小型圆形盾牌。

2.我给他们一把仪式长剑的理由是因为他们应该是“宫廷守卫”。 如果我们能证明这一点，我希望我们能保留长剑。

3. 我认为没有任何单位有护胫。 其中一些是层状鳞片。 

4. 我在那个帖子中发了一个帖子，可以帮助我们决定哪些头盔与哪些纹理搭配。

 

1. But the Roman cavalry controlled the spear with one hand, not the Ji with two hands like the Han army.
2. Chinese court guards use long weapons including Ji. In China, long swords are generally worn by nobles when they wear dresses to show their class status. They are not used in battle, and they are basically not seen on soldiers.
3. I mean, there shouldn't be any protective gear on the calf, there is no such ancient object unearthed.

[AIEND]

36 分钟前，wowgetoffyourcellphone 说：

1.我可以很容易地从冠军骑兵身上取下盾牌。 我也可以给他们“cataphract”动画。 

• 我会说罗马骑兵使用盾牌，所以不是一个很好的例子。 罗马帝国骑兵甚至使用大型椭圆形盾牌，而不仅仅是小型圆形盾牌。

2.我给他们一把仪式长剑的理由是因为他们应该是“宫廷守卫”。 如果我们能证明这一点，我希望我们能保留长剑。

3. 我认为没有任何单位有护胫。 其中一些是层状鳞片。 

4. 我在那个帖子中发了一个帖子，可以帮助我们决定哪些头盔与哪些纹理搭配。

 

More often, the long sword that appeared on the brick carvings of the Han Dynasty is called Banjian, which is a wooden ceremonial prop, which has been recorded in the literature.
We haven't seen the use of the long sword in the military establishment. In fact, you should know that the long sword is a very difficult weapon in our opinion. It is heavy but not powerful enough for slashing.

[Lion.Kanzen]

16 minutes ago, AIEND said:

1. But the Roman cavalry controlled the spear with one hand, not the Ji with two hands like the Han army.
2. Chinese court guards use long weapons including Ji. In China, long swords are generally worn by nobles when they wear dresses to show their class status. They are not used in battle, and they are basically not seen on soldiers.
3. I mean, there shouldn't be any protective gear on the calf, there is no such ancient object unearthed.

you have to examples of these weapons?

[AIEND]

23 分钟前，Lion.Kanzen 说：

你有这些武器的例子吗？

If you want, you can give government ministers long swords so they can fight.

Edited February 28, 2022 by AIEND

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

This was why I wanted to give the champion infantry a long sword:

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

Repeating Crossbow was invented in the 4th century BC:

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Repeating_crossbow#/History

[AIEND]

14 分钟前，wowgetoffyourcellphone 说：

连弩发明于公元前 4 世纪：

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Repeating_crossbow#/History

This kind of repeating crossbow is more like a scorpion crossbow than an ordinary individual weapon, so except for a few generals, such as Li Guang, soldiers will not be equipped with it, because they have a lot of pulling force, and ordinary people can't pull it away.
If the repeating crossbow in your mind is this kind of weapon, it only appeared in the Ming Dynasty.

[AIEND]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

这就是为什么我想给冠军步兵一把长剑：

In fact, this soldier model is not in line with historical facts, it is just a "cool" thing that some manufacturers have come up with to sell for money.

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 minute ago, AIEND said:

In fact, this soldier model is not in line with historical facts, it is just a "cool" thing that some manufacturers have come up with to sell for money.

The armor looks good. Is it very impractical?

[AIEND]

2 分钟前，Lion.Kanzen 说：

盔甲看起来不错。 是不是很不切实际？

The armor skirt covering the thigh is wrong, and the protective gear on the forearm and calf is also wrong.

The characteristic of Chinese armor is to try not to increase the load on the calf and forearm, which leads to a decrease in endurance. Because we thought shields and spears would protect those parts.

 

20 分钟前，wowgetoffyourcellphone 说：

连弩发明于公元前 4 世纪：

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Repeating_crossbow#/History

This is the first repeating crossbow

[Lion.Kanzen]

12 minutes ago, AIEND said:

The armor skirt covering the thigh is wrong, and the protective gear on the forearm and calf is also wrong.

The characteristic of Chinese armor is to try not to increase the load on the calf and forearm, which leads to a decrease in endurance. Because we thought shields and spears would protect those parts.

 

This is the first repeating crossbow

Yikes..

 

We got the wrong weapon, apparently.

 

[AIEND]

2 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

哎呀。。

 

显然，我们拿错了武器。

 

The problem is that this kind of crossbow from Chu State was not unearthed in the Han Dynasty. As far as written records are concerned, the Han Dynasty people used a much larger repeated crossbow than this, and they used winches. That is to say, the Han Dynasty continuous crossbow is largely the winch crossbow that I suggested you to cancel (used to defend the city instead of attacking the city).

[AIEND]

7 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

哎呀。。

 

显然，我们拿错了武器。

 

I suggest that you give the winch repeating crossbow to the Han Dynasty as a technology or faction feature to improve the firepower of the city defense, so that you don't have to study the Han Dynasty repeating crossbow that actually has no reference object.