You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Mod Design and Discussion
Moderated by Sebastien, John the Late

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.390 replies
Age of Kings Heaven » Forums » Mod Design and Discussion » Noobie questions
Topic Subject:Noobie questions
« Previous Page  1 ··· 7 8 9 10 11 ··· 12  Next Page »
posted 07-12-14 09:53 AM CT (US)         

..A lot of silly questions..

Thank you for your time

[This message has been edited by Jorgito_aqua27 (edited 11-10-2014 @ 12:22 PM).]

John the Late
posted 11-01-14 05:22 PM CT (US)     281 / 390       
original AoC (Voobly)
Sounds like you'd say that the original game could only be played at that client and as if would only consist of that MP part.
Philippe le Bon
posted 11-01-14 05:59 PM CT (US)     282 / 390       
Discussion closed, we're high on assumptions here.
posted 11-07-14 01:28 PM CT (US)     283 / 390       
@Kallehagen: Hi! I hope you are still around, do you still have that list that you offered me?

If you do, can you send it to my mail? (its on my profile).

Thanks in advance!!

Concerning the waterfalls, I am making new ones with more frames

@Vardamir: That unit that you ask is for a new mod that have more unitsm civs and different gameplay.
But also will be the "champion" of the boring reskin mod 2 (a more generic version, not the one posted on the screenshots).

@SauloMagnus: Yes I am making a new version

Thanks everybody for the kind comments!
posted 11-10-14 12:49 PM CT (US)     284 / 390       
Hi! I need YOUR help, with some questions..

I need to know what are this guys using, armor and weapons:

Vanilla sword line

A- Militia:
-Head: it is a leather cap? or brown hair?
-Chest: looks like a blue shirt with a leather vest on it?
-Shoulders: blue shirt.
-Hands: leather gloves.
-Legs: blue pants
-Foot: leather boots.
-Weapon: club?

B- Man at arms:
-Head: it looks like a metal helm, but wich one? some kind of visorless sallet? or a spangen helm?
-Chest: blue shirt with a metal plate covered with leather straps?
-Shoulders: blue shirt.
-Hands: leather gloves.
-Legs: blue pants with a leather skirt?
-Foot: leather boots.
-Weapon: sword + shield.

C- Long swordsman:
-Head: A chain mail hood? or is a norman helm?
-Chest: looks like a plain blue shirt?
-Shoulders: blue shirt.
-Hands: metal gloves or chainmail gloves?
-Legs: it looks like chainmail pants with a blue skirt.
-Foot: leather boots.
-Weapon: sword + shield.

D- Two handed swordsman:
-Head: a spangen helm with the back part of leather? or that is brown hair or his neck?
-Chest: Looks like solid plate.
-Shoulders: some golden big metal pauldrons, with a blue shirt.
-Hands: it looks like it have no gauntlets but have like a leather bracer?
-Legs: long blue skirt.
-Foot: leather boots with some blue things.
-Weapon: two handed sword or bastard sword.

E- Champion:
-Head: A sallet with the visor up? a hounskull bascinet with the visor up?
-Chest: I have no clue! a blue.. thingy?
-Shoulders: some blue pauldrons? they are metal or what? and what the hell is that thing on his back? a really short cape?
-Hands: metal gauntlets.
-Legs: gah what the hell is this? It looks like golden tassets and blue pants? but why? is this some kind of weird gothic armor or what is it?
-Foot: metal greaves, sabatons.
-Weapon: two handed sword.

I really want to understand what is the champion using, it bothered me since always, and the silly hunchback standing dont help at all.


Thank you for your time

Once I got this units covered I will ask questions about the others.
posted 11-10-14 01:24 PM CT (US)     285 / 390

now you see them larger

[This message has been edited by DJeronimo (edited 11-10-2014 @ 01:25 PM).]

posted 11-10-14 01:44 PM CT (US)     286 / 390       
That is awesome! do you have another pictures of the units on a bigger size? Maybe some old renders?

I still dont get the champion armor.

-Head: some kind of of barbuta?
-Shoulders: looks like golden pauldrons now. But what is the thing on the back? is a tiny cape?
-Chest: looks like a metal breastplate and a blue plackart?
-hands: still looks like metal gauntlets.
-Legs: some weird golden tassets with blue pants.
-Foot: metal sabatons, greaves.


Most of the units looks like a silly mix of N.E and W.E but the armor choices dont make any sense.

It looks like the game improve his units using some linear advancement like from poor equipment to good equipment.

But in realty the game moves from periods of time right? You start on the dark ages and end on the Imperial age (whatever that is).

So the armor progression + weapons dont make sense.

Why the 2handed swordsman looks like some kind of weird mix of 11 century armor when it should be using transitional armor?

Also the names are really wrong too, the final upgrade should be the man at arms and should use a pole axe.

Also why the pikeman is upgraded to a halberdier and it looks like a downgraded weird version of the pikeman?

So many questions

Thanks for your time anyway.
posted 11-10-14 02:55 PM CT (US)     287 / 390       
i believe that the original creators knew something about historical fashion but in their quest to represent so many nations in so few units they chose some polivalent types of armour. a second thought could be that they were puzzled by the shield problem since the unit has only 5 directions, and the other 3 are mirrored, so they decided to drop the shield which is very very unrealistical for the period! the rest is their fantasy. you can search for better pictures on the net, but i think the one above was the best
Devious Dev
Official Professional Qualified Noob
(id: dragonslayermcmx)
posted 11-10-14 03:39 PM CT (US)     288 / 390       
May I humbly ask what font you used for that georgous title?

Paradise Lost ~ Scored 1st in the ACSC12! ~ Voted Best Cinematic Scenario of 2013 ~ Official Rating: 4.7
Demon Town ~ Scored 1st in the HHC11! ~ " unique as an AoK scenario can get." - Panel ~ Official Rating: 4.2

Proud Member of BlackForestStudios
My AoE2 Youtube Channel
posted 11-10-14 04:26 PM CT (US)     289 / 390       
Here something i found in my AOE Folder,
i think i got the files from here long time ago.

This should help you, also when they are not complete
(missing legs)

Edit: If you need nore Units, let me know and i can upload it.
The Icons are from the beta. Size is 210x210 PNG & TGA Format.

[This message has been edited by Kallehagen (edited 11-10-2014 @ 04:36 PM).]

posted 11-10-14 05:00 PM CT (US)     290 / 390       
@DJeronimo: well that makes sense, but I still dont get why so many big errors.

Also is clear that they didnt even care about the arabs and asians civs, because all the units are based on europeans armors.

The tiny size of the units make a lot of people imagine some weird stuff.

I never noticed this before as a common player till I started to make units and started to research about why and when those things where used.

Also the explanations of Kor have helped me a lot to understand this.

All this research and silly questions that I have are helping me a lot to improve my units designs, now they have a more reasonable upgrade system, on my first reskin mod I was trying to make everything look "cool" and that was a big mistake, because a lot of people get confused because trash units looked good instead of poorly equiped as they should been.

@Devestator: The font is called "ring bearer" is from the Lord of the rings, but was edited to appear as a 3d text. I used a metal texture and edited the lighting and some other stuff to make it look like that.

@Kallehagen: that is awesome!!!

Please if you have more units upload them here when you have time!

I wasnt so wrong as I tought.. I made some mistakes but everything is really clear now.

They made the couter on the arm blue instead of metal, and when you see the tiny unit on the game it just look like a piece of blue cloth instead of armor.

The champion makes more sense now I cant believe that I wasnt that wrong as I expected. Is really interesting to see how they mixed those styles, the little cape still confuses me.


Thanks a lot guys
John the Late
posted 11-10-14 05:20 PM CT (US)     291 / 390       
I think that a large collection of these pictures was uploaded a while ago, but I can't seem to find where anymore.
posted 11-10-14 05:21 PM CT (US)     292 / 390       
I love looking at close up renders of AoE assets! You get to see so many little details otherwise impossible to pick out, like the champion helmet being the same as the man-at-arms, just with a visor.

These last close ups and many others can be found here.
posted 11-10-14 05:25 PM CT (US)     293 / 390       
Big thank you to everybody, you guys are way too kind
posted 11-10-14 05:33 PM CT (US)     294 / 390       
The Champion have a thing on helmet that can protect the face,
but he no used it as seen in the pictre (dont know the name).

Here are all the other Icons:

i tried to organize them same as in the game.

Edit: i will also ad a ZIP Archive included with the PNGs.
ok i see others find already the pack while i was uploading the images.

[This message has been edited by Kallehagen (edited 11-10-2014 @ 05:35 PM).]

posted 11-10-14 06:12 PM CT (US)     295 / 390       
...and the hussar is wearing a bearded helmet!!...a detail i have not reconginzed before, thank you kallehagen!
posted 11-10-14 06:24 PM CT (US)     296 / 390       
Hussar isnt in the Pack, because when the icons was created (beta game) there was no hussar. i think you mean the cataphract.
hussar is wearing similar a teutonic knight helmet or same more light grey.

[This message has been edited by Kallehagen (edited 11-10-2014 @ 06:29 PM).]

posted 11-11-14 02:28 AM CT (US)     297 / 390       
Yep same type of helm with feathers on top
posted 11-11-14 06:15 AM CT (US)     298 / 390       
sorry, i ment light cavalry!!!!
posted 11-11-14 05:22 PM CT (US)     299 / 390       
Mahazona where did you get the icons from the Expansion ?
posted 11-11-14 11:37 PM CT (US)     300 / 390       
I just Googled aoe 2 hussar and this came up,it was in some weird page about aoe 2 unit stats.
This page has all the AOK UU pics.
this has petrad
this has most of what is posted here

[This message has been edited by Mahazona (edited 11-12-2014 @ 00:09 AM).]

posted 11-21-14 12:41 PM CT (US)     301 / 390       
Thank you everybody for your answers

And thanks Kallehagen for taking the time to upload all those pics!


I know I am being annoying but I want to understand a few things.

Let me introduce you first to what I found so you can read it too, and then I will ask my noobie questions.

This is a description of what Age of empires is:

"The player has control over a society and guides them through four different time periods or "ages". The game begins in the Dark Age, where very few buildings and units are available. After a short time when requirements are met, the user gains the ability to advance their civilization beginning with the Feudal Age, where more upgrades, buildings, and units become available. The next age is the Castle Age, in which the powerful castle may be built, and used to produce powerful units including the unique unit of each civilization. Finally, the user can reach the Imperial Age, which is reminiscent of the early years of the Renaissance. Once the user has reached the Imperial Age, they gain access to all the upgrades, units, and buildings that may be built and researched for their specific civilization."

"The Dark Ages are commonly placed between 476 and 800 AD, from the fall of the last Western Roman Emperor in Rome, to the coronation of Charlemagne as the Holy Roman Emperor (a prestigious Catholic tradition which had its origin in precisely the Emperor of Rome). The Dark Age (ca 500-800 AD), being the first game-age of Age of Empires II, is followed by the Feudal Age (ca 800-1200 AD), the Castle Age (ca 1200-1400 AD) and lastly the Imperial Age (1400-1500 AD). All of these shorter periods make up what is commonly known as the Middle Ages (ca 500-1500 AD]]."

1- So as I tought, the game "moves" throug time, you can see it some what clear with the buildings with tatched roofs and wooden walls improve to stone buildings,etc, but with the units that doesnt happend.

The armor progression doesnt make sense at all, not even if they pick a single period of time and upgrade the gear on a linear way to represent a richer social status or better technologies.

For example the archer that is set on the "dark age" have a plate chest armor:

Around those time mail was used, so why plate?

Also the archer upgrades to a crossbowman, that lose the plate chest and recive a leather chest...

That doesnt make sense, In any case the progression should be clothes + leather, then brigandine, and last some plackart with brigandine, or just plate.

Another example is the militias that looks like peasants with some leather stuff and a stick

but they should have looked at least like a mix of carolingian armor with norman armor.
Lot of chainmail.. I get it.. that is to represent cheap looking units, but still is wrong because the game moves throug time, you are using an 800ad soldier, not a baddie peasant with a club.

Then it is upgraded to the man-at-arms, you are supposed to be on the feudal age.. but the unit recive plate armor and a helmet that is wrong too.

Then is upgraded to the long swordsman, this one isnt that bad, it have some plate and a short hauberk on top, it should be using a hounskull bascinet instead of a chainmail hood.

Then is upgraded to the two handed swordsman it have a wrong helmet, he should get metal gauntlets instead of leather bracers and bare hands (the long swordsman have them why remove them?) and the long hauberk style wasnt used around the 1400 anymore.

Finnaly the champion.. It is "allright" but if they are on the 15 century, the armor that was used was mostly gothic armor, and the weapons used to fight people on that armor was the pole axes.


Question time:

Is This how they should have looked if we follow the game logic of moving in time?



Long swordsman:

2handed swordsman:



Second part:

If you see the most part of the campaigns are from the high middle ages, with some tiny exceptions like Joan of arc (age of kings) that is around 1428 and some stuff that where added on the Conquerors expansion like spanish conquistadors and some things on the Forgotten, but the games focuss heavily on the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries and most of the "campaigns" or "battles" are even older focusing on the dark ages.

The game doesnt do much to represent the 15 century and the "rennaisance", the precense of gundpowder is on the handgunners and the "bombard cannon".

"Artillery powered by gunpowder was introduced to Europe in the 1320s and spread quickly. Handguns, which were initially unpredictable and inaccurate weapons, were not recorded until the 1380s"


Question time:

So taking in consideration that the 15 century is not even displayed on the game, that the handguns where most used in 1380 and the fact that I mentioned about the campaigns and choose of civs of the game.. Is ok to say that the game should end around the 1380? And be set on the High middle ages mostly?


I ask this, because I am making a second version of the unit reskin mod. And I want to be as accurated as I can whit the graphic designs.

So.. what do you guys think about this?

Sorry for the wall of text
posted 11-21-14 12:59 PM CT (US)     302 / 390       
well, well, there are mentions of gunmakers around 1370 and even earlier! the arabs had them by 1200 (with the fall of china), and the indians and chinese latest by 900 AD...

and also i believe the creators of aok wanted a mixed representation of different ages which is why it is so confusing!

also note that carolingians, italians and byzantines had musculatas in use at least till 1200, just enaugh to mark the beginning of new plate armour!

also to separate the feudal age from castle age seems to me a nonsense! feudals means people holding fortified watchtowers that will become castles...and this could be by 950 already...

the carolingian militia shuld look like the guy on the cover of the age of charlemagne (the infantry guy).
also why aren't you speaking to the fe people to create more unit lines like light, sem-equipped and heavy. you are jumping from one thing to another! here a semi-equipped infantry, than a heavy one and so on...i believe it is not accurate enough! heavy infantry was also at the times of charlemagne, and since the bronze age, so how come to mix these traditions?

[This message has been edited by DJeronimo (edited 11-21-2014 @ 01:17 PM).]

Mr Wednesday
(id: matty12345)
posted 11-21-14 05:41 PM CT (US)     303 / 390       
One of the things that makes this confusing is it isn't just period improvements. The game follows age of empires, where you are basically starting your civilization from scratch, and it has the same feel. So militia aren't just supposed to be early infantry, they're also supposed to be whatever cheap men your tiny kingdom can muster. The term militia sort of implies less trained or inferior levies.

The men at arms are your first quality soldiers. This term was used in all ages to describe fighting men. So for feudal age it would make sense to be chain mail. The Long swordsman isn't really a good name for an upgrade, and Two handed swordsman upgrade is nonsensical, as two handed weapons existed along side bastard and one handed swords. The champion is in the same age as the two handed swordsman and he again speaks of a quality upgrade, not a period upgrade. Champions are just the best swordsman.

And that's the best line. Cavalier and knight mean the same thing, archers and crossbowmen are different weapons entirely, as are pikes and halberds. They don't work as period OR quality upgrades.

If i was doing this, I would go like this:

1. Militia - Cheap looking unit. Leather/chain mail
2. Man at arms - Quality chain mail, typical early norman or crusader look
3. LSM - Mix of plate and chain mail to imply some transition
4. 2HSM - Plate mail suit
5. Same as above, but with feathers, a cape, or something like that to show he is a champion.

Your pictures are pretty good, but I'd make the norman the man at arms and make the militia a cheap looking unit.

"And Matt is a prolific lurker, watching over the forum from afar in silence, like Batman. He's the president TC needs, and possibly also the one it deserves." - trebuchet king
posted 11-21-14 05:42 PM CT (US)     304 / 390       
The game isnt very accurate in its timeline. The real Middle Ages encompasses 410/476(fall of Rome) to usually 1453(fall of Constantinople) or 1492(Columbus discovering the New World). Its usually divided into Low, Middle, and High. The 'Dark Age' was something created by Renaissance writers to distinguish their time period(1300-1500) from earlier time periods.

The game uses Dark/ Feudal/Castle/Imperial Ages although obviously they are not that accurate. Castles similar to the ones we know today started appearing in Europe at around 1100 CE? So technically Dark and Feudal would encompass 400 CE -1100 CE.

For the armor, the Early Medieval Period would be leather or chainmail, which would transition slowly into plate mail by the Castle Age, although I believe chain mail was still worn under plate mail and by poorer troops. And technically by the Imperial Age which transitions into the end of the Medieval Period you would see plate mail being phased out as gunpowder weapons and guns become more advanced and better at penetrating plate mail.

As far as the gunpowder, I dont think the game ends at 1380. 1380 is when the first primitive hand cannons were being used in Europe. They were rudimentary and not effective. They later developed into better firearms: matchlocks, arquebusiers, etc.
posted 11-21-14 07:52 PM CT (US)     305 / 390       
Thanks everybody for the replys so far

@DJeronimo: I should have been clearer about the gundpowder, what you said is correct, but wanted to acept it or not, age of empires foccus heavily on the west/north european civs, the 90% of the units are europeans with the exception of the unique units and the mounted archers.

So I wanted to say that they where introduced around the 1320 for the W/N european civs.

Concerning the creators wanting a mixed representation of different ages this is what I found on the wiki:

"Historical elements

The development phases of the Age of Empires games were similar in several ways. Due to the games being based on historical events, the team often had to do large amounts of research.[65] However, the research was not in depth, which, according to Age of Empires designer Bruce Shelley, is "a good idea for most entertainment products."[65] Shelley also said that Ensemble Studios took most of the reference material from children's sections at libraries. He pointed out the goal was for the players of the game to have fun, "not [its] designers or researchers."[65] At the Games Convention Developers Conference in 2007, Shelley continued with this thought and explained that the success of the series laid in "making a game which appealed to both the casual and hardcore gamer."[66] Shelley also remarked the Age of Empires games were not about history in itself, but rather "about the human experience;"[66] they focused not simply on what humans had done but on what they could do in the future such as "going into space."[66] Ensemble Studios developed Age of Mythology in a different way than the previous two games. The team had worried they "couldn't get away" with a third historical-based game, and chose mythology as the setting after they had discussed several options.[67]"

So they pretty much make a game with some historical things but mostly cool looking units?


You mention that I should talk with "fe people" what is that? in spanish fe means faith lol so I am lost here.


@Mr Wednesday: You are totally right about what you are saying, thank you for your suggestions.

My main problem that is confusing me is for example lets talk about the infantry line.

If I follow the game logic that advance on the medieval history from the 476 to 1500, I imagine that you always have the best looking knight at your dispossal but it looks like on the period of time that you are currently playng.

So if you are on the dark ages your knight will look like a carolingian soldier, if you are on the feudal age your knight will look like a crusader,etc.

What makes him different and looks improved is the evolution of the armor through time not that they advance in a linear way like you suggested that the militias are armed peasants.

The naming is also really wrong because for example "man-at-arms" the second unit upgrada, that name was given to the best soldiers that could be nobles or not.
Champion isnt used anywhere, its more like a fantasy name.


So let me se if I get this right, the game improve through time, but the units improve on a linear design, they all belong to the same period but the upgrade is the "trainning" you start with armed peasants then you give them some mail, then some plate and so on?


@chiruscan: You are right about the armor progression. And that is what I am trying to do once I clear everything.

What I mean with the game ending around the 1400 is that there is nothing on the vanilla game without mods that show you that you are really on the 15 century when you reach the imperial age.

Why there are not cuirasers, or culverines, or arquebusiers. Why the champion uses a weird gothic armor version instead of maximilian armor, or why the paladin still looks like a knight from the 1300? it should be using a horse covered in plate instead a caparisoned horse, he just look like the cavalier but have a different helm and some plumes :S

What makes me think about the game ending around the 1400 is:

1- The units graphics and the armor/weapons that they use
2- The imperial age lacking 15 century stuff
3- Almost all the official campaigns are based on the 1300 and older times too, with so really few exceptions.


Thank you so far
posted 11-21-14 08:18 PM CT (US)     306 / 390       
What makes me think about the game ending around the 1400 is:
After reading the comments I would also agree to this most of the more later stuff got added in the expansion not the original AOK(spanish UU's japaneese and korean campaigns).
So they pretty much make a game with some historical things but mostly cool looking units?
This would be the main reason for the unit looks if you look at the beta M@A unit he was fully covered in chain mail and looked more accurate I think.
posted 11-22-14 01:46 AM CT (US)     307 / 390       
I guess the best thing to do would be to treat the Feudal Age as the Low Middle Ages/Viking Age/Dark Ages, the Castle Age as the High Middle Ages, and Imperial Age as the Renaissance/15th century and onward.

So for armor in the game, Dark Age militia should have leather armor, Feudal Age troops should all have chain mail, Castle Age could have a mix of chain and some limited plate mail or full plate mail, and the Imperial Age could have high quality plate mail or probably the phasing out of plate mail for gunpowder.
posted 11-22-14 10:17 AM CT (US)     308 / 390       
You mention that I should talk with "fe people" what is that? in spanish fe means faith lol so I am lost here.
I think he's referring to myself and the other folks from the FE/AoF team, so I'll take the liberty of answering the question in advance. Currently we have no plans to change the unit lines or add new ones (despite how much the accuracy of the game bothers me as well) as we don't want to change the game structure.

Obviously, the above only pertains to the AoF expansion. I would love to see other mods do a better job graphically or etymologically with regard to the units (see Matt's post for details with regard to unit names) than ES did with AoE2.

In general, I'd say that the Middle Ages are generally placed from the 5th century (endless debate over which year, as various historians point to Alaric's sack of Rome, Odovacer's rejection of Zeno's imperial regalia, the emergence of the Franks, or even the fall of Roman Britain) to 1492AD (Reconquista and Columbus). Some even point to the Milvian Bridge and Conversion of Constantine (312) as the beginning of the Middle Ages, though this is probably a bit premature. 1492 is pretty universally accepted as the end as it marks a larger historical phenomenon (the completion of Spain's reconquest and emergence as a premier world power, and the overall European shift to looking westward- the beginning of the colonial era). The events of 1453, while definitely major points in causation, was only one of many factors that pushed Europe into the Age of Colonialism.

Not that that helps way too much, seeing as the timeframe of AoE2 is 400-1600AD if you look at the campaign scenarios. If you look at the History section, then they have "Medieval" civs rising in the 3rd century (Sassanid Persia), so clearly there's inconsistency here

~ Forgotten Empires ~

Storm on the Steppe | Galderton Hill RP | Proud member of Stormwind Studios

"Deyr fé, deyja frændr, deyr sjálfr it sama; ek veit einn at aldri deyr, dómr um dauðan hvern." - Hávamál 77.
posted 11-22-14 10:25 AM CT (US)     309 / 390       
Well this is a game and not a history book so it will have changes here and there we have the huns in the game .

Anyone notice that the champion is black skinned?
posted 11-22-14 12:24 PM CT (US)     310 / 390       
@chiruscan: Good suggestions, thank you

@HockeySam18: well fe meaning forgotten empires instead of faith makes sense haha, I always have some trouble understanding djeronimo.

Yeah I know that the foccus of the expansion is to add things that look the most similar possible to the vanilla game.

There are lot of crazy/retarded people that just complain even if you add a new plant for eye candy scenario editor only lol, because "child memories" are beign ruined with graphics that "dont belong"

Just reading the campaigns complains.. that "they are not like the old ones" ...just.. the amount of stupidity is mindblowing, I liked the new campaigns btw, specially dracula, the map design looks awesome.

It is sad, because with the power that the team have, they could have done an improved version of the game fixing all the nonsense that the vanilla game have concerning the unit lines, the civs, etc and be something official.. But if you did that the purists fanboys probably would have killed you all with fire and pitchforks.

And Microsoft just keep making those bad games like castle siege, world domination,etc for the phones.

@Mahazona: do you have some screenshots of how the beta units looked? it would be really nice for me to see the original plan before they changed it to this.

I dont think the champ is dark skinned, is just the shadows casted by the helm.
posted 11-22-14 05:23 PM CT (US)     311 / 390       
As you probably all know, you can make any unit heal like a hero with Trisolo_tc's method. But how do you do it when you want to heal, say 2 or more hp at a time?
posted 11-22-14 07:21 PM CT (US)     312 / 390       
@Mahazona: do you have some screenshots of how the beta units looked? it would be really nice for me to see the original plan before they changed it to this.
Tachi would be the best person for this I have only seen a few units and they are AOE sized so cant rally tell about the details much.There were tons of pics in the forum but most are inactive now.,36353,0,5,36452,,5

This guy is the beta M@A and Pikeman

Knight line

Some more units im not sure whats these guys were in the beta

[This message has been edited by Mahazona (edited 11-22-2014 @ 10:45 PM).]

posted 11-22-14 08:54 PM CT (US)     313 / 390       
where can i find the beta trebuchet? and the beta ram!

[This message has been edited by DJeronimo (edited 11-22-2014 @ 09:00 PM).]

posted 11-22-14 10:05 PM CT (US)     314 / 390       
Tachis making of mod had a ram without the death and dying parts.I have also seen a fully working unpacked treb also but not sure where.

It would be cool if someone can upload the working beta/alpha units and buildings in one pack so it's easier to find them.
posted 11-22-14 11:35 PM CT (US)     315 / 390       
Aye, it's a tough balance and invariably you can never please everybody. I love adding new stuff though (especially editor units and objects) as in my opinion more stuff in the editor is never a bad thing!

Honestly I wouldn't worry too much about the criticism and such. It's often the case that gamers are divided between the "loud minority" and the "silent majority". The significance here is that the minority of people that aren't happy will complain, while the majority who are happy will say nothing and enjoy your work. Some of them, of course, will offer compliments as well. If you look at your uploads here, Steam, and Moddb and count the downloads/subscribes, then you'll see that the vast majority of people are enjoying your work and not complaining. You've been doing some great work here

Thanks for the comments about the campaigns though, they are much appreciated. I agree with you, different is good! It would be a shame to wait 15 years only to get new campaigns that were only of the same level of the ES campaigns. In the end I liked the healthy mix that we had- a nice diversity between B&D, FF, and RPG scenarios, with better map design than the ES campaigns and some new gameplay features and ideas. Btw, the Dracula campaign was designed by me and Jan dc, I'm glad you liked it!

EDIT: @Mahazona: It's amazing how much the beta pikeman looks like the Civ3 Pikeman/Roman Garrison.

~ Forgotten Empires ~

Storm on the Steppe | Galderton Hill RP | Proud member of Stormwind Studios

"Deyr fé, deyja frændr, deyr sjálfr it sama; ek veit einn at aldri deyr, dómr um dauðan hvern." - Hávamál 77.

[This message has been edited by HockeySam18 (edited 11-22-2014 @ 11:36 PM).]

« Previous Page  1 ··· 7 8 9 10 11 ··· 12  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Kings Heaven | HeavenGames