"Shadow" schedule

[Blakmane]

... so awesome =D. I agree that the empyrean religious logo needs cropping though. it's a bit ugly as a complete square.

And a reduction in religious civics/techs???? I loved them!

[Nikis-Knight]

Of course, (as Nikis-Knight should know) if you make your own suggestions for new leaders it just might get implemented. Quit complaining and get to writing

heh .

[southxii]

. . . if you make your own suggestions for new leaders it just might get implemented. Quit complaining and get to writing

Hmmm. On it. I'll brainstorm tonight. Do I need a civilopedia entry too? Or just ideas and leader traits? Or artwork? (Design a leader contest? Ha ha.)

[Kael]

Originally Posted by Blakmane

... so awesome =D. I agree that the empyrean religious logo needs cropping though. it's a bit ugly as a complete square.

And a reduction in religious civics/techs???? I loved them!

We add constantly to the game. Version 0.30 will have more of everything than 0.25 does. But we can't just keep piling on. Instead everything that is added gets tried and tested and if its not good enough, it gets cut. Not to say it wasn't good, it just isn't good enough.

We aren't afraid to cut things, even if we spent a lot of time working on them. In shadow you will see that some features have been removed, some techs are gone, some promotions are gone, some civics are gone, some units are gone (in fact a whole unitclass that every civ had access to has been removed), some buildings are gone, etc.

Im sure the immediate reaction will be that some people will want to keep the things we cut. Everyone likes different things and for 9 people that never used an option and don't miss it there will be 1 person that will.

Even though it sounds ridiculous considering how much stuff we've packed into FfH, it has never been our goal to add as much stuff as possible. Instead we truely try to make sure every object is as good and interesting as possible, if it isn't we remove it to make way for something else.

[MagisterCultuum]

Well, you better not have cut too much. I'm still not over losing the Core of the Subtle.

Hopefully a few old ideas can make a comeback, or maybe I should try to make a modmod incorporating all the old stuff that has been cut (assuming it can be done with only xml/simple Python coding)

By the way, is there somewhere you can still get a copy of earlier versions, including Light and the versions of Fire that had the disciple cycle promotions? I deleted them to save memory, but borrowing their code could be quite useful.

[xienwolf]

Aye, it could prove quite useful for a mod-modder to find old copies from each stage to implement everything. But personally, I am pretty happy to see most of the changes. Though I dread the loss of an entire unitclass! (please don't be recon! Let it be Melee )

[Grillick]

If I had to guess, I'd say archer.

[[NWO]_Valis]

Nah, siege weapons or mounted.

[Blakmane]

yeah, mounted would have to be pretty redundant especially, I never get anti-mounted promos or use the anti-mounted units (even against hippus).

I don't mind cropping, and i'm sure everything will be the better for it. I just hope there's not too much loss of flavour/strategy because of civic chops- IMO there's really only two viable choices of civic in each civic slot (godking or city states, for example), and more often than not one of those choices is a religious civic. I guess the other civics are gonna be balanced to make up for it, i'll just have to see =)

[Bad Player]

Originally Posted by MagisterCultuum

Well, you better not have cut too much. I'm still not over losing the Core of the Subtle.

Hopefully a few old ideas can make a comeback, or maybe I should try to make a modmod incorporating all the old stuff that has been cut (assuming it can be done with only xml/simple Python coding)

By the way, is there somewhere you can still get a copy of earlier versions, including Light and the versions of Fire that had the disciple cycle promotions? I deleted them to save memory, but borrowing their code could be quite useful.

I have a few old versions on my PC (which I don't have access to ATM - maybe a few weeks down the track) so maybe I could help you with some old versions. If you still want them in a few weeks hit me up for them.

[[NWO]_Valis]

yeah, mounted would have to be pretty redundant especially, I never get anti-mounted promos or use the anti-mounted units (even against hippus).

Well, it is just that all mounted units can be also classified as melle or archery or recon etc. Mounted could be a promotion that would give a unit following properieties: no defence modifiers, flanking/withdrawal rate, access to 'mounted' promotions, etc. Also anti-mounted promotions would still have its use but the other anti-melle/etc would add and that would be logical.
With that you can have arcane-mounted units, disciple-mounted units and so on. Yup, I an betting for mounted.

[Apepis]

It could be as well Disciple class who got cut. Or Arcane. Or Recon . Seriously, who knows? I wonder WHY to throw out a whole unitclass...

[MagisterCultuum]

I'm pretty sure unitclass doesn't mean general types of units like mounted, recon, or melee (that is called a unitcombat). It refers to specific units (and all UUs that replace said unit)

The BtS conversion had already gotten rid of one unitclass (prophet) although the Malakim UU (lightbearer) became its own unitclass and stuck around longer (although becoming virtually useless). I'm actually hoping that he meant that Shadow just got rid of this unitclass (even though it hasn't been in BtS Fire versions either). Having Lightbringers doesn't really make much sense now anyway, since their religion has been implemented in the main mod (of course, I was expecting them to become the Empyrean's basic disciple unit and be available to everyone, but that position has been taken by the Ecclesiastic)

[Apepis]

Originally Posted by MagisterCultuum

I'm pretty sure unitclass doesn't mean general types of units like mounted, recon, or melee. It refers to specific units (and all UUs that replace said unit)

Well, that makes sense. If so, it would mean Kael expressed in drastical way an intention to remove only ONE unit.

Personally, I think we should expect the loss of Beast unit category, or something equally usefull. After all, demons are recognized by Demon promotion, so are Dragons, Elves, Orcs, and so on. Why not make other "beasts" use the same mechanic?

[TheJopa]

I think pikes, some mounted units, shield walls, are all qualified for removing. Flurries and Marksmen as well as it stands, but I'd rather have them boosted a bit and with some better abilities (esp. flurries).

[Aroldo]

Playing around with the tech tree sounds difficult. Simplify it too much and you lose interesting options. Clutter it with technologies and you risk adding redundant stuff. Cut whatever you deem necessary, but please, keep the range of - sensible - choices as wide as possible.

Reorganizing/rationalizing the whole units/promotions system on the other hand sounds good.

All in all, just keep up with the excellent work. It´s quite impressive what you´ve been doing.

[zxcvbnm]

Seems that they are likely cutting some religion-specific techs

[seZereth]

Originally Posted by Aroldo

... Cut whatever you deem necessary, but please, keep the range of - sensible - choices as wide as possible...

thats the doctrine of Kael

[onedreamer]

I'd vote on the Elohim hero having a vote in the Overcouncil instead of his current ability to give his life for peace...: powerful but pretty much limited.

[Grey Fox]

Originally Posted by onedreamer

I'd vote on the Elohim hero having a vote in the Overcouncil instead of his current ability to give his life for peace...: powerful but pretty much limited.

Better have both then. If you sacrifice him for peace you also give up his vote.