Return to the Roots

First of all you guys did an awesome job with this 'unofficial expansion'. I really like most of the changes. Here are my suggestions, please tell what you think about them:

1. 'Do not burn' option. Option that will let you capture enemy buildings/people instead of burning everything around. For example: if you capture enemy Fortress you also capture territory that 'belongs' to that Fortress and also buildings/people/resources.

2. Advanced Trade Routes. You are able to create 'trade routes' between storehouses (your and your allies). To exchange goods you will need... donkeys ;) (in a similar way like in Settlers3).

3. Residences. People are so cheap in Settlers2. Too cheap in my opinion. I prefer the Settlers3 solution for 'creating' people. Residences, special buildings that will 'create' people. This time the 'created' people should just stay in a residences till they will be needed for something (just like in headquarters). (residences also should require food in my opinion).

4. Copper mine. Copper should be required to create Tools in Metalworks. In my opinion we should just complicate the economy in S2 because it is rather too simple.

5. Sulphur mine. Sulphur should be required to use Catapults (Stone+Sulphur) because Catapults are powerful but cheap. Sulphur also could be useful in...

6. ...Ship fights. It would be totally awesome if you would be able to do ship fighting in this game. Because now all we can do with ships is to transport goods and people and that's not very realistic.

Tell me what you think about my suggestions and keep up the great work ;)

A lot of those suggestions seem to be inspired by S3, but since thats a drastically different game I dont think that they'd work in S2. Not to mention that personally i didnt really like S3 and think a lot of the changes Blue Byte made there were a bad idea.

1. I thought about this too, and it wouldnt be too hard to implement. The only problem for which i havent come up with an answer so far is how to handle buildings that would be in no mans land, or exactly on the border: Burn them? Make them neutral?

2. Not exactly sure what you mean by that. Transporting wares between your own warehouses is a basic feature present even in the base version of S2. For transport between allies you should check out the trading addon.

3. Also not sure if this would change very much, since in essence it would mean warehouses produce only a limited number of settlers (Warehouses being a combination of S3s mansion and storehouse). Players would just have to build more warehouses - so I'm not too convinced about this feature.

4. Copper mine: It would make all currently existing maps pretty much unplayable, since you couldnt produce any tools. RTTR could auto-change some iron into copper, but then i dont see the point of the whole change...we can just leave it at iron.

5. See 4. Also, since catapults are so powerful, there's already an addon dealing with that by limiting the number you can build.

6. Seems to me like this would be a lot of work for a feature thats very rarely used. But then again, someone else would have to judge how it would shift balance on sea maps, since I dont really play those.

What i'm missing is a rationale on why those changes you suggested would be a good idea or an improvement over the currently implemented mechanics.

Thanks for quick answer.

1. Burn them, that's probably a better idea. However making them neutral would be more realistic but I think it might cause bugs. I suggest you to try both options ;)

2. I am talking about caravans like in Settlers3. You know, Donkeys are transporting goods from one land to other. That's how the trade works in S3 if I remember correctly.

3. Hm... but I thought Headquarters already are able to produce unlimited number of settlers. My point was to make some limits. You know, like with Donkeys. You have some Donkeys by default in Headquarters but you can run out of them, so you have to breed them. So I thought it would be cool to make something like that with settlers. In S3 you can run out of people if you for example turn all of them to soldiers.

4 and 5. I know that it might be controversial but I thought it would be good to not only change/improve/bug fix the old game but also to add some new things. Like for example new mines, new buildings, new resources, etc. But that's all up to you.

6. First of all I agree with you that it definitely won't be easy. As you said we can only build ships in a special sea maps and honestly I don't like the way it is right now. In other strategy games you can just build ships in every map you want, if there is a water of course. So it would be another thing to change and with that change ship-fights would be really more important in a gameplay. But as I said before, this is up to you.

PS: additional question, is diplomacy working or am I doing something wrong... Whatever I do, CPU is still attacking me.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 28.10.2014 08:37

1. That wasnt so much a suggestion as rather the only (both bad imo) options i could come up with. I dont really like either of those solutions, although i'd love the idea to take over buildings.

2. Sounds pretty much like the trade addon in RTTR.

3. They do. As do warehouses, which would be the equivalent of the mansions you suggested. I think RTTR experimented with limited settlers by just lowering the rate at which those are generated - but really the only difference it makes is how soon and how many warehouses/mansions you'd have to build. As I remember it, Land is a much scarcer resource in S3 - which is also the main limiting factor there, not the fact you have to build houses.

4/5. New stuff is always nice, but there should be some goal at which changes or additions are aimed at. New just for its own sake is rarely a good idea. ;)

6. Like i said, lots of work required to get this working. Not only coding, but also ship models, animation, working out balance etc. Not something i'm going to do, since I dont think its worth the effort. If you want to work out a concept w/ covering the aforementioned points i'd be more than happy helping to implement it into the game though.

Diplomacy is working, the AI however isnt using it. When clicking the buttons in the diplomacy window, you are only proposing pacts to other players, in order for one to be established the other party has to accept. Currently the AI doesnt do that.

1. If you love the idea, you can try to do something about it ;)

2. Yea you are right, you can forget about this one. However I have problem with this addon. I can trade settlers to my CPU ally but somehow I can't trade any goods. Icon shows that I have 0 goods available for trade but that's not true. I was trying to send them anything, but nothing happens.

3. Ok I get it.

4/5. Well from my point of view the economy in S2 is too simple, so I was trying to complicate it a bit with new resources. New resources means new buildings, new economical 'chains', etc, which means that game will be more interesting. My goal with copper/sulphur was to make the game a bit more harder and challenging, because now you just have to find coal, iron and gold.

6. Ok, forget about ship fights. What about the possibility to create Harbor on every map? Or the possibility for a guy with a boat to transport people through the waterways? I will give you a good example of what I'm talking about. I'm playing the 'Europe' map. I started in Italy and it is impossible for me to build anything on that little Sicilia island. I can make a waterway with a boatman, boatman can transport boards and stones but I can't build anything because settlers can't swim, boatman is unable to transport people and it is not a sea map so I can't build a Harbor. It would be cool to let boatman transport people or maybe create kind of a bridge?

Diplomacy: Ok, I hope it's gonna be fixed in future updates ;)

I think the trading addon is still somewhat buggy, at least from what i've experienced when trying to use it. If you cant transport wares, i think its due to the lack of donkeys in the warehouse, as far as i remember they are used (like you suggested) to transport wares.

Building a harbor on any map wouldnt be too hard to do in RTTR, but you do need the big spot on the shore - something that usually isnt present on non-harbor maps.

As for transporting settlers via boat, i think this has been suggested before, and wouldnt be too hard to implement. We would need graphics for settlers in boats though.

Building bridges is actually a nice idea, and now that i come to think of it i think i even saw some bridge graphics somewhere (although i'm not too sure about that). Implementing this wouldnt be too hard either.

Im Ruhestand

Yes, bridges have been discussed a lot already. Those are the posts:
http://www.siedler25.org/index.php?com=forum&mod=forum&action=thread&id=971

If you would add those settlers by boats quixui - I'd make those graphics (for each job one graphic as ware
should do the job) but if its as sad as with your nice Boot Camp...

---

Not entirely sure whats sad about the boot camp. I implemented it, prepared the code for other race gfx and uploaded it...cant really do more about that :(

At this point I dont even remember whether it was integrated or why it wasnt into trunk - for me it works just fine, and this working version is still sitting in my upstream. Adding new stuff would be more of a problem though, since my upstream and trunk have probably diverged quite a bit due to me not updating it.

I'll check out adding support for transporting settlers via boat - the number of gfx required should be 6*#Jobs, and while thats a decent amount of work (more if we want to animate them inside boats), it shouldnt be too hard though since it would mostly be cutting out parts of the walking gfx and fitting them onto boats.

Im Ruhestand

That's the sad point,you got it,we don't. Maybe I'll ask maqs once again.

Yeah you are right,jobs*6, damn - I know that resources only have one graphic. I'll have a look at those graphics on
Sunday,if you aren't faster making them.

Bridges - well no idea which way would be the best to add those, maybe a 2 part bridge, each side could go up,same
level,go down - they would be a bit limited then.

---

Oh, my bad. I haven't checked whether I have any donkeys available... Now trading goods is working, however I also lost my donkeys (they have become my ally donkeys) and it was rather unexpected :P

Harbors on every map would not be necessary with bridges and boat-travelling. In my opinion bridges would be perfect to cross rivers, small lakes, etc. For further travelling boats will be better, because I think we should avoid situations when bridges are extremely long since it would be rather unrealistic.

Oh and one more thing. With current addon we are able to create extremely long waterways but with only one boatman. And boatmen are slow. So I think it would be good to make them faster. More than one boatman on a waterway (like on a road) is not a good idea, especially with boat-travelling. Dividing waterway with flags... I don't know.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 28.10.2014 19:18

Two more things:

In RTTR AI is playing more aggressive than in original S2 and that's cool but it would be better to make AI play more wisely. For example AI sometimes builds approx. 20 mines while only half of them is really working because of lack of food. AI also often is trying to build so many things at the same time and this leads to the lack of boards and stones. This rapidly slows their progress in the game and is the reason of their low productivity.

And one more idea. Paved Roads. Strictly speaking roads made of stone (Stone/Granite required). With paved roads settlers and donkeys would be able to move and transport goods much faster than on normal or donkey roads. I suggests this kind of progress:
Normal road -> Donkey road -> Paved Road
You can say that players will quickly run out of stone but with current addon we can make granite mines to be inexhaustible + not everyone must have paved roads and not every road must by paved (for example only segments). I suggest 1 stone to be required to make one part of the road (from flag to flag) paved.

Paved roads are a nice idea as well. We'd need somebody to provide the graphics for those though.

Im Ruhestand

https://bugs.launchpad.net/s25rttr/+bug/367191

Paved road idea has been added "Reported by Spike on 2009-04-26" 5 years ago ;)

---

It would also be cool and realistic to add religion and churches/temples to this game since all nations have their own gods. However I don't like the way religion works in S3. Definitely I am against priests with spells. So far I can't think of any good purpose for temples but I generally like this idea.

Im Ruhestand

Just an example screenshot. Hopefully you are aware, that normally goods only
have one direction and not 6 so it may needs some more tweeking for people
transport on ships.

Edit: Just made a version for normal thin carriers. I wanted to make all
graphics for each job but we should test if those are working or not. Sadly
neither my webspace is available nor do I have a working bzr on my computer
at the moment so hopefully you can download from zippyshare.

http://www19.zippyshare.com/v/97306498/file.html

The folder ist called MAP_0_Z.LST like the original.

IDs: 4000-4005
Type: player

They should be ordered right (facing to the right side and turning clockwise)

---

Editiert von Spike am 01.11.2014 20:22

This looks really nice Spike, good job :)

Im Ruhestand

Also mad a paved road texture. Sadly it's not possible at the moment to test those ingame because replacing textures doesn't work/is
buggy somehow...

So, I have no idea what this graphic would look like ingame

---

Going to try both of those as soon as possible.

Zitat:

1. 'Do not burn' option. Option that will let you capture enemy buildings/people instead of burning everything around. For
example: if you capture enemy Fortress you also capture territory that 'belongs' to that Fortress and also buildings/people/resources.

I think this was already suggested a long time ago. Yeah it would be great to have it as an optional feature, although I like the way
S2 just destroys everything. Instead I'd suggest an "instant destroy" option where you don't have to wait for the buildings to burn
down, because in the middle of a fight, time is quite essential.

Zitat:

2. Advanced Trade Routes. You are able to create 'trade routes' between storehouses (your and your allies). To exchange goods
you will need... donkeys ;) (in a similar way like in Settlers3).

As I'm not a big fan of S3, I don't really like that idea. Trade routes with your allies however are possible with the current nightly
versions of the game, not sure about the "stable" releases though. It's still buggy but works most of the time if both of the
storehouses aren't too far away from each other.

Zitat:

3. Residences. People are so cheap in Settlers2. Too cheap in my opinion. I prefer the Settlers3 solution for 'creating' people.
Residences, special buildings that will 'create' people. This time the 'created' people should just stay in a residences till they will
be needed for something (just like in headquarters). (residences also should require food in my opinion).

That's one reason why I don't like S3/S4 as much as I do S2, because it just annoyed me to build & destroy residences again and again.

Zitat:

4. Copper mine. Copper should be required to create Tools in Metalworks. In my opinion we should just complicate the economy in
S2 because it is rather too simple.

This would render most of the maps that are currently in the game unplayable, so I don't like it. A better way would be to make the
metalworks use iron & coal like in S3/S4 in my opinion.

Zitat:

5. Sulphur mine. Sulphur should be required to use Catapults (Stone+Sulphur) because Catapults are powerful but cheap. Sulphur
also could be useful in...

The same thing I wrote about idea number 4. The current addon which just allows the building of a limited number of catapults is a
better solution for this problem IMHO.

Zitat:

6. ...Ship fights. It would be totally awesome if you would be able to do ship fighting in this game. Because now all we can do
with ships is to transport goods and people and that's not very realistic.

That would be a great addition to the game in my opinion because it would make the sea maps more interesting to play, because you'd
have to secure your ships with additional warships.

No offence intended with my answers, but it just reflects my opinion on certain things ;)

Zitat:

I think this was already suggested a long time ago. Yeah it would be great to have it as an optional feature, although I like the way S2 just destroys everything. Instead I'd suggest an "instant destroy" option where you don't have to wait for the buildings to burn down, because in the middle of a fight, time is quite essential.

Yes, 'instant destroy' is another good idea. I like to play on 'Slow' and 'Very Slow' speed of the game and everything is burning extremely long. Sometimes I'm just annoyed with that.

Zitat:

That's one reason why I don't like S3/S4 as much as I do S2, because it just annoyed me to build & destroy residences again and again.

Funny how I like S3 mostly because of that. And new mines of course. I guess I'm generally a big fan of mines and ores. Definitely I don't like priests, archers, the way you control soldiers, the way you 'build' roads, etc because these modifications have drastically changed the game.

Im Ruhestand

Yay opinions \o/

Zitat:

This would render most of the maps that are currently in the game unplayable, so I don't like it. A better way would
be to make the
metalworks use iron & coal like in S3/S4 in my opinion.

I do not agree. The way it currently works is kinda great - you first make iron with the iron smelter (here the coal is used) and
then you use that iron with boards to actually make the tool. If it was one building you had all 3 components needed for a
tool.

Zitat:

Yes, 'instant destroy' is another good idea. I like to play on 'Slow' and 'Very Slow' speed of the game and everything
is burning extremely long. Sometimes I'm just annoyed with that.

I'm a bit confused about that - why should that "problem" only appear when playing on slow? It's the same in every other
speed setting - frames are just faster. I like the way it is and would just add that building sites with more than 0 used
materials should also burn.

Also a more realistic way: buildings neither just disappear nor are burnt - they are just made unusable - so either you
reconstruct the building (causing 50% material costs) or deconstruct them (giving 50% material cost).
That's in my opinion the only possible change without losing s2 charm.

EDIT: my smiley lost an arm :<

---

Editiert von Spike am 04.11.2014 07:52

Zitat:

I'm a bit confused about that - why should that "problem" only appear when playing on slow? It's the same in every other speed setting - frames are just faster.

Well I didn't say that 'problem' appears only on slow or very slow speed of the game. I said that on these settings that 'problem' is more annoying than on others. I'm just not a big fan of long burning animations. Quorzom wrote that he doesn't like to wait for the buildings to burn down and I totally agree with him. I think we should leave it to be optional. Some might like the way it is right now, some might prefer 'instant destroy' option without burning, others might prefer capturing the enemy buildings. On multi the host should decide which option will be used. Pure democracy :D

Editiert von Krugslayer am 04.11.2014 10:13

Im Ruhestand

Zitat:

is more annoying than on others.

Still don't get it. Everything is slow - you like it,burning houses is also slow, you dislike it more as if you were playing on fast.
I just don't get the reason ^^

Zitat:

Quorzom wrote that he doesn't like to wait for the buildings to burn down and I totally agree with him. I think we
should leave it to be optional.

Well I guess we had more players requesting other options than 2 and they were never implemented. I just wanted to give
my opinion and idea - so maybe other agree or disagree. At very end it's not the server host who decides but a dev (who
could add such an addon) if its possible or not ;) so it's just filtering. Also you can just add those wishes on your own to our
bug tracker :)

---

Zitat von Spike:

Also you can just add those wishes on your own to our
bug tracker[...]

...or even more effectively, to the game itself. Yay for open source :)

Paved Road gfx by Spike (w/o taking special care of mountains or building entrances):

Im Ruhestand

Well, I kinda dislike it - unless you don't say something else, I'll do an other try

---

Sure, go ahead. I've modified my client allowing me to easily switch road gfx, so it's gonna be quite easy testing others.

Im Ruhestand

Well, I'm 100% sure that I was able to overwrite the tex5 somehow. Still got a screen where I tested bridges as road texture -
no idea what I made. I can't pack a *.lbm file - a folder called tex5.lbm is not overwriting while starting but tex5.lst overwrites
the file (still not working).

I'll just use a bit more brown colors,like roman roads were built, bit more grass - well well will see :D

---

Well if someone has the skill and time to add those suggestions and addons, why not? If you don't like them, just don't use them.

On behalf of the paved roads:

Yeah the paved roads look okay in my opinion but that should not be the final version of them. There still is some room for improvement
I think. Perhaps you could make them look a little bit like those old Warcraft 1 roads:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9e/Warcraft_Orcs_v_Humans_01.png

or something like this:

http://www.incgamers.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/northward-2-1024x576.jpg

Im Ruhestand

Yeah, those look good and kinda represent what came into my mind.

Main Problem is: The texture I'm drawing is not 100% the same drawn ingame. It's kinda... strange, I have no idea how roads are drawn.

This picture maybe explains my problem ;)

---

When I kill an enemy with my catapult, I can't see the change in 'vanquished enemies' statistic. That statistic only counts enemies which died of a sword on a battlefield and that should be changed.

Im Ruhestand

Should not be changed since it is like the original game. Also killing someone with a stone from far away is not really "vanquishing"
;)

---

Zitat:

When I kill an enemy with my catapult, I can't see the change in 'vanquished enemies' statistic. That statistic only counts enemies which died of a sword on a battlefield and that should be changed.

Spike is correct, you won't even see that in the original game so it won't be changed since RttR tries to stay true to the original game. Although you can still see it under the "military strength" tab in the statistics. That is, if your opponent isn't recruiting new troops fast enough to compensate for that :D

Two things. First of all in original game you are able to kill with catapults even your own allies (I hated this). So the term 'vanquished enemies' logically doest not fit. And if you think that the word 'vanquished' is not appropriate, you can change it to 'killed enemies' :P I know that this isn't something really important but in my opinion that statistic should show how many enemies you killed overall. I think that is the point of that statistic or at least should be.

In RttR you are still able to kill enemy troops with catapults, they only don't show up in the vanquished enemies tab, so it's the same behaviour as in S2. It would be really annoying if they would fire on friendly buildings, because that would really destroy 2v2s, 3v3s and so on.

I never said that I don't think the term "vanquished" isn't appropriate, but again that's how it was called in the original game, so I think it won't ever be changed to "killed enemies".

And to be honest, I don't really like playing with lots of catapults, because you don't really need much skill in order to spam catapults (just enough building materials like stones/boards, no decent food/mining economy) but your mileage may vary on that. But a lot of players I've met over the years totally agree on that and most games I've played were with limited catapults (3 or proportional on small maps). In my opinion BlueByte added them for bad players who needed them to compensate for a lack of skill, the same goes for the "friendly fire" bug/feature.

In the end it is up to a developer to decide whether or not he/she wants to waste time for such a minor thing instead of doing something useful like fixing bugs or adding new interesting features. Although discussing it won't hurt anybody.

Editiert von Quorzom am 09.11.2014 23:20

Personally i think you're right Krug, this should be changed. Not everything in the original S2 is perfect, and this is one of the things that imo the original devs just missed.

Its a nice find, and i'll add this to my client. That being said there isnt too high a chance you'll see this change also integrated into the official rttr build, since there is a wide consensus the original game should be emulated as close as possible, including flaws.

As I wrote before it would be good to implement religion in S2, since it would be realistic. Every nation has it own gods. Now I have an idea for temple.

Temple:
- requires 9 gold coins and 9 *meads(see below) to be 'activated'. When 'activated' it will increase the number of 'hit points' of all of your soldiers. What I mean by that: For example private must be hit 3 times to die and general must be hit 7 times to die. With temple 'activated' private will have to be hit 4 times to die and general 8 times to die. So yea, it means that temple will be powerful but I couldn't find any good purpose for that 'building' except the military one.

Of course it could works in few other ways, for example: it could increase (by few %) the chance of each of your soldiers to hit enemy soldiers or decrease (by few %) the chance of enemy soldiers to hit your soldiers (doesn't matter if private or if general).

It could also requires more gold coins or *meads to be activated or many boards and stones to be build. I also highly suggests to limit the number of temples (just like catapults). Or that temple could be 'activated' only for a short time and then you will have to 'fill' it again.

*Meads. Remember meads? Yea, settlers 3, Amazons. I thought to myself 'wine is cool but limited only to Romans, rice is cool but Vikings with rice... but hey, bees are everywhere'. I like the idea of honey and mead and I think it should works just like in S3. Beekeeper's hut which requires trees, meadmaker's hut which requires honey + water to make mead. Besides we already have charburner which works similar to 'Coal maker's hut'.

I really like the idea that it could be used to buff your soldiers, like giving them more HP or making them hit harder, like make 1 hit count for for 2 hits.

I think temples would be a great feature to add, but I must admit that I fear that it will create huge balancing issues, especially if every faction gets their own productions (i.e. Romans - wine, Vikings - mead, Asians - rice wine...).

I still remember from S3 that the Asians needed a swamp & coal for their rice wine, whereas the Romans just needed to build wineries. That was a horrible choice in terms of balancing in my opinion.

My suggestion would be to make one universal "sacred" ware, perhaps something like frankincense. It would be more S2 like IMHO because until now there are no wares/buildings which are exclusive to a faction. And it would be much easier to add too.

The production line could work like this: A sacra tree farm, a big building like the farms, a medium building called the frankincense maker and another big building, the temple. The temple then needs 9 frankincense & 9 coal to perform the ritual in order to make your soldiers stronger.

That would be my suggestion on how to add religion to RttR. I hope some of you guys have something to say about that.

EDIT: something to read about frankincense if you have no clue about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankincense

Editiert von Quorzom am 11.11.2014 17:29

Zitat:

I think temples would be a great feature to add, but I must admit that I fear that it will create huge balancing issues, especially if every faction gets their own productions (i.e. Romans - wine, Vikings - mead, Asians - rice wine...).

I still remember from S3 that the Asians needed a swamp & coal for their rice wine, whereas the Romans just needed to build wineries. That was a horrible choice in terms of balancing in my opinion.

I agree with you that own products like in S3 (rice for Asians, wine for Romans, etc) would create issues and bugs and this is simply unnecessary. So my suggestion was to implement honey and mead (honey + water = mead, like in S3) for everyone. This is realistic, because bees are everywhere (and trees are everywhere), so it doesn't matter if you are Viking or Asian or African. I don't know how about you, but I really enjoyed playing as Amazons in S3 and I liked the idea about honey and mead.

I have one more idea for temples.

Alternative version, more concrete and a bit simpler:
- Only one temple can be build
- Temple requires 9 gold coins and 9 meads to be activated
- Temple can be activated for 10 minutes (for example)
- Within this time you are able to create 2x more soldiers than normally
a. you need only sword + beer or only shield + beer to create soldier
b. you need sword + shield + beer to create 2 soldiers instead of 1

I think it might be a cool alternative for those who prefer to have more private soldiers than generals, so they can spend their gold on temple.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 11.11.2014 18:09

Indeed, if the temple ever gets implemented into the game it should be a building which can only be built once.

Of course mead would be a great idea as well, because it was known in most of the cultures involved in Settlers. Here are some facts about mead in ancient cultures:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mead#History

However, using gold/coins in the temple isn't a great idea IMHO, because using your coins efficiently is a major part in winning a multiplayer game, although that really depends on the map. Unfortunately most maps aren't really built to consider a 2nd purpose of coins.

Another thing I don't like about using coins is that producing generals will still be easier/better in order to win the game, at least if you know how to do it efficiently. The same often is true with the char burner, you won't need it most of the times, at least I only built it on a few occasions.

Although IMHO it would be a better idea to just create a new production line which doesn't involve coins - like the one I explained in my earlier post, or mead like you suggested. If the honey still needs trees in order to be produced it will be fine I think. This way you need to sacrifice some land which you could otherwise use for farms. Although making the beekeeper work like farms is another good idea.

The frankincense idea has an advantage I think, because you always need lots of coal and just having one building more that uses it won't hurt as much as using coins which are really important to win the game, because 1 coin is basically 1 general if you do it right. And it makes sense to use coal in order to burn the frankincense, whereas I don't see a way of logically implementing coal into mead production.

Editiert von Quorzom am 11.11.2014 19:26

Zitat:

However, using gold/coins in the temple isn't a great idea IMHO, because using your coins efficiently is a major part in winning a multiplayer game, although that really depends on the map. Unfortunately most maps aren't really built to consider a 2nd purpose of coins.

Another thing I don't like about using coins is that producing generals will still be easier/better in order to win the game, at least if you know how to do it efficiently. The same often is true with the char burner, you won't need it most of the times, at least I only built it on a few occasions.

I got your point about coins. Indeed 9 coins are a lot. So maybe it would be 2 or 3 coins or something different (maybe that frankincense). Well another interesting idea was implemented in S4. Temples made of gold.
Now it looks like this:
Gold + Coal + Mint and we have gold coin. But what about something like this:
Gold + Coal + Gold Smelter = Bar of gold. Bar of gold could be used to build Temple or in a Mint to create coins.
So: Bar Of Gold + Mint = Gold Coin.
This is exactly how it works in The Settlers Online game (Gold Smelter -> Bar Of Gold -> Mint -> Gold Coin). Interesting and realistic idea because in many cultures temples for gods were made of gold. And it would be much cheaper because you only have to build temple once.

In some cultures animals were used as a sacrifice for gods. Maybe we should build kind of a sheep farm... for meat or for sacrifice (same with pigs?).

Editiert von Krugslayer am 11.11.2014 20:26

Out of convenience - for both the devs and the players - it would be easier to just use the standard materials stones & boards for building it. The required amount of boards & stones should be about the same as for a harbour or a fortress. I don't really see the point in building a gold smelter in order to produce gold bars which are only needed to build one building. It's just too much effort IMHO.

However, sacrificing animals like pigs really is a great idea. I'm surprised I haven't come up with it myself when thinking about how religion can work in RttR. Two reasons why I think it is a great idea:

1. It would give the pig farms far more relevance, because at the moment they need more space than mills and bakeries which makes them inefficient for supplying your mines with unlimited food.
2. On top of that, you just need to implement a temple in order to make it work. That only requires designing 1 new building for every people - there are currently 5 peoples in the game - instead of 2 or 3.

Okay so now some thoughts about how it could be implemented with this approach:

Let's just say you would need 10 pigs for a "ritual" to make your soldiers a little bit stronger. Although I'm not sure whether or not it should be hitting harder or gaining more HP for a small amount of time. Or even something like being temporarily invulnerable.

The duration of it should be quite short so you won't get too strong if you play it out well. Your enemies still have to stand a chance against you, so I'd suggest limiting it to something like 1000 gf or so.

EDIT: Maybe this topic deserves its own thread.

EDIT: The priest who will work in the temple could then also use a cleaver to kill the pigs.

Editiert von Quorzom am 11.11.2014 21:10

Balancing/functionality changes can easily be changed afterwards, and implementation shouldnt be too big a problem - i really like the idea of a temple and would implement it myself. The biggest issue i see with this endeavor at the moment is we need new gfx - at least the building (for each race), plus priests and animation if we want to see some action there.

Several things would be needed - some of them optional - the latter options being more work:

- New Building "Temple" (needs gfx for each race)
- Work animation for temple: easiest is sacrifice indicated by smoke only, more complex is a priest animation
- Uses existing wares (sacrificing pigs is a nice idea) vs creating a new ware*
- Using existing settlers (e.g. carrier) as worker vs creating a completely new job "priest" (lots of gfx work)

* creating a new ware would in turn require:
  - new ware gfx+carry animations
  - new production building (with gfx for each race)
  - work animation/field - depending on what the new ware is
  - (new tool?)
  - (new worker/job animation? (again lots of gfx work))

Once we have these (or at least parts), we can realistically talk about functionality and implementation details (for which i have several ideas myself).

Zitat:

It would give the pig farms far more relevance, because at the moment they need more space than mills and bakeries which makes them inefficient for supplying your mines with unlimited food.

Exactly. Solution from S3 (different food for each mine) would fix this problem. You know, fish only for gold mine, bread only for coal mine, meat only for iron mine. This could work, especially now with inexhaustible fishes. With this solution you will have to build pig farms to win the game. So you will have mills with bakeries and pig farms with slaughterhouses (because even with Temple, there would be still no need for slaughterhouses). And granite mine? I think we should leave it the way it is right now, so all kind of food accepted.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 12.11.2014 18:44

It looks like you are a great fan of S3/S4, because most of your suggestions this far have just been like "making the game more like S3". What comes next? Removing the roads because they are just inconvenient to build? Or using S3 graphics? Sorry, but I couldn't deny myself some sarcasm...

Perhaps you should check out the android remake of Settlers 3, it looks like that game would fit you much better. Here is the link: http://www.settlers-android-clone.com/

No offence intended of course, but I really prefer the way S2 handles certain things and it should stay this way.

Of course someone could make another AddOn that makes it work like this, but I really don't see the point. The economy runs fine the way it is and doesn't need such changes that would only make it worse IMHO. Let's do not repeat the same mistakes BlueByte did back in the day.

Although that's just my opinion, S3 & S4 was a big disappointment for me back then.

Editiert von Quorzom am 12.11.2014 20:16

But game now looks like this:
- without inexhaustible fishes you just build mills and bakeries for your mines, no need for pigs because they require more boards and stones
- with inexhaustible fishes if you are lucky enough and you have wide access to water, you can spam fisheries and you don't even have to build mills and bakeries

You see, no need for pigs and slaughterhouses. If you think that my proposition goes way too far, lets think about something like this: fish and bread for gold, fish and meat for coal, bread and meat for iron. The point is to let the game force you a bit to build fisheries, mills and pig farms. The point is to make the game a bit more varied and to raise the importance of pig farms and slaughterhouses.

And if you are seriously curious, S2 is my favourite game of Settlers but S3 and S4 aren't that bad. They are the 'real settlers' for me (except every game that comes after S4). Of course there are many elements that I don't like in both S3 and S4, that's why S2 is my favourite.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 12.11.2014 20:37

Just deal with it. What's so bad about building just bakeries? A loaf of bread should be enough to satisfy your hunger.

By the way, you can apply the same logic to granite mines or char burners - you won't need them very often too. On top of that: On small maps it doesn't really make a big difference if you build donkey farms either if you make sure to build a decent road network. So now we have 4 buildings which are completely optional.

If you still want to build them I have a little suggestion for you: Play against the AI and see if you can satisfy your miners with just building pig farms and slaughterhouses. If RttR would be a game with achievements, that would be one ;)

A few examples where building a few pig farms can come in handy:

Every mine can only take 2 units of bread/meat & fish, so if you economy starts breaking down, you will be able to supply your mines longer if you have built a pig farm and a slaughterhouse.

It is sometimes wise to build one - depends on the starting conditions though -, because you won't need to manufacture an extra tool, it wastes iron that could be used for manufacturing a sword/shield).

If I play on low goods for example I often build one pig farm to use the cleaver that is in my HQ, so I won't have to manufacture another rolling pin at the metalworks.

This is particularly useful on big maps where space to build is not an issue - and even less of an issue if you build your settlement efficiently with a rhombus system and terraforming - especially big maps which involve sea travel (i.e. King of the Sea, Migration etc.).

Editiert von Quorzom am 12.11.2014 21:05

Fair enough. I can see your point but hopefully you can see my too. Still, it is just a suggestion. It's normal that we won't agree on everything.

Im Ruhestand

Zitat:

Exactly. Solution from S3 (different food for each mine) would fix this problem. You know, fish only for gold mine, bread only
for coal mine, meat only for iron mine. This could work, especially now with inexhaustible fishes.

Using the inexhaustible fish addon for anything is just a bad idea - it's disliked widely. Although I like the idea of supplying
coal/iron mines only bread, while gold/granite mines only use meat. Fish can be used by both. That'd be a good addition.

Zitat:

Perhaps you should check out the android remake of Settlers 3, it looks like that game would fit you much better. Here is the
link: http://www.settlers-android-clone.com//

hihi :D

Zitat:

But game now looks like this:
- without inexhaustible fishes you just build mills and bakeries for your mines, no need for pigs because they require more boards and
stones

Looks like nobody ever played a large seamap. Thats the point when you will use pigfarms. Also just regarding stronghold crusaders -
you also only built bakerys ;)

---

Editiert von Spike am 12.11.2014 22:33

Yes, I can see your point and totally agree that there might be better ways to deal with food supply. And I know it is far from perfect the way it is, but always remember:

RttR tries to stay as close as possible to the original and that's why it will most likely stay the way it is, and always has been. Also, I think implementing your ideas would heavily alter the gameplay, since food production is a key element in the S2 economy.

Okay, so now I go a little bit off topic:

I don't know if you have ever heard about Widelands. I really don't like the game, although I think it has an interesting way to make both meat & fish vital for your food supply in a "kind of S2 like fashion": Meat/fish & bread are made into rations, which are then used as a food supply for your mines. Nonetheless, it is a completely different game, so it doesn't really matter for RttR though.

Editiert von Quorzom am 12.11.2014 23:33

Zitat:

I don't know if you have ever heard about Widelands.

Hey I've never heard of this game before, thanks. I've checked it out.
The amount of different building materials is just ridiculous and there are some unnecessary buildings. From my point of view there are two things from this game which might be useful in RttR:

- visible 'workarea' for buildings, for example quarry or woodcutter's hut (visible but not changeable)

- upgrading military buildings if there is enough space for it (also like in Settlers 2 anniversary) -> barracks to guardhouse, guardhouse to watchtower, watchtower to fortress. This solution might be really useful is some cases.

Zitat:

Meat/fish & bread are made into rations, which are then used as a food supply for your mines

You are talking about Tavern. In that building you are able to make meal/snack for miners from fish/meat/bread. Hm... I'm not sure what to think about this. What about something to drink for miners? Water/beer/mead/milk, whatever.

On the other hand Arena/War Camp building where you can promote your soldiers from privates to generals could be also nice but the way it works now is more useful and comfortable.

EDIT: Another possible function for pig farm. Pigs from farm could go to Tannery(new building) and they would be converted to armor(another thing requested for making a soldier). This is exactly how it works in Knights and Merchants game.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 13.11.2014 22:58

Zitat:

- visible 'workarea' for buildings, for example quarry or woodcutter's hut (visible but not changeable)

I'd really like to see that in RttR and I don't think it has been added to the wishlist yet. (I might be wrong though)

Zitat:

- upgrading military buildings if there is enough space for it (also like in Settlers 2 anniversary) -> barracks to guardhouse, guardhouse to watchtower, watchtower to fortress. This solution might be really useful is some cases.

This would be a great feature too - but it has been added to the wishlist quite some time ago.

Zitat:

On the other hand Arena/War Camp building where you can promote your soldiers from privates to generals could be also nice but the way it works now is more useful and comfortable.

A similar building (the training camp) has been recommended for RttR a while ago, but I think it is still missing some graphics. Although Spike or quixui can tell you more about that.

Zitat:

You are talking about Tavern. In that building you are able to make meal/snack for miners from fish/meat/bread. Hm... I'm not sure what to think about this. What about something to drink for miners? Water/beer/mead/milk, whatever.

I think some of the factions (I remember the Barbarians, it's been quite some time since I played it) in Widelands need beer for rations/meals/whatever.

Zitat:

EDIT: Another possible function for pig farm. Pigs from farm could go to Tannery(new building) and they would be converted to armor(another thing requested for making a soldier). This is exactly how it works in Knights and Merchants game.

The tannery is good for Knights and Merchants (btw you should check out KaM Remake), considering KaM has a bigger emphasis on military (e.g. formations, directly controllable troops, ranged combat etc.) than S2/RttR has, therefore it wouldn't make much sense in RttR IMHO.

Oh, and perhaps you should check out the Bugtracker to see what kind of suggestions/wishes have already been added: https://www.launchpad.net/s25rttr/

Zitat von Quorzom:

A similar building (the training camp) has been recommended for RttR a while ago, but I think it is still missing some graphics. Although Spike or quixui can tell you more about that.

Yes, it's still missing all non-roman building graphics. Other than that, its sitting in my upload fully functional, just hasnt been included into the main branch.

Thats also the reason i strongly urge you that while ideas and suggestions are a good thing, providing graphics to back those up would do so much more*. There's a good amount of awesome stuff in this thread, but without gfx we cant introduce them - and i'd really love to implement some of the ideas here.

*Training camp startet just like that: i found the building in an old thread, really liked both the look and the idea and went ahead implementing it.

Editiert von qUiXui am 15.11.2014 12:54

Im Ruhestand

Zitat:

Yes, it's still missing all non-roman building graphics. Other than that, its sitting in my upload fully functional, just hasnt
been included into the main branch.

As far as I remember the main problem was, that it wasn't a patch - but thats not for sure.

Zitat:

Thats also the reason i strongly urge you that while ideas and suggestions are a good thing, providing graphics to back those up
would do so much more*. There's a good amount of awesome stuff in this thread, but without gfx we cant introduce them - and i'd really
love to implement some of the ideas here.

Regarding trainingscamp, settlers in boats, paved roads - making placeholder graphics for testing, then adding (not just finishing but
really adding to the game), then fully gfx - it's just useless to make a gfx for something you can't test. Thats the main reason for me
(guess we have nobody else who made s2 like graphics at the moment) to not do any gfx.

Also, but thats just a human thing I guess, addons I dislike and don't get enough ideas like "I have an Idea for building xy and
it should totally look like: http://www.somelink.com".

So, if adding content and communication would work way better then I could pixelate some more GFXs (if somebody likes to).

EDIT: Also paved roads are an example for problems - I can do graphics, but can't test them anyway, which makes working sometimes...
slow

EDIT2: Hopefully those roads look better ingame...

http://www.rfmonline.de/rttr/spike/roads.zip

EDIT3:

Zitat:

[13:51:54] * qUiXui (---) hat #siedler2.5 betreten
[13:52:09] <qUiXui> servus
[13:52:52] * qUiXui hat die Verbindung getrennt (Client Quit)

Damn, I was not able to react in 58 seconds :<

---

Editiert von Spike am 15.11.2014 14:05

Zitat:

A similar building (the training camp) has been recommended for RttR a while ago, but I think it is still missing some graphics. Although Spike or quixui can tell you more about that.

Yes, it's still missing all non-roman building graphics. Other than that, its sitting in my upload fully functional, just hasn't been included into the main branch.

Interesting. I'm curious if this building will be to train soldiers (sword+shield+beer) or to promote them (gold coins)? Or both?

Zitat:

I think some of the factions (I remember the Barbarians, it's been quite some time since I played it) in Widelands need beer for rations/meals/whatever.

Yes but you have to upgrade your Tavern to Inn and that beer is needed only for 'deeper' mines. Tavern is not a bad idea. But in RttR (if someone decides to add it to the game) I suggest to use water instead of beer. Because if one portion/ration is fish+beer, bread+beer or meat+beer then you would need lots of breweries, farms, etc. Water is cheaper.

Zitat:

Oh, and perhaps you should check out the Bugtracker to see what kind of suggestions/wishes have already been added: https://www.launchpad.net/s25rttr/

Oh yes, now I see it. Earlier I thought its only for reporting bugs.

Too bad I don't have enough skills to make my own gfxs.

Zitat:

Yes but you have to upgrade your Tavern to Inn and that beer is needed only for 'deeper' mines. Tavern is not a bad idea. But in RttR (if someone decides to add it to the game) I suggest to use water instead of beer. Because if one portion/ration is fish+beer, bread+beer or meat+beer then you would need lots of breweries, farms, etc. Water is cheaper.

I think it won't be added because it heavily affects the way the economy works. It may be fine for Widelands - but not for RttR.

Zitat:

Interesting. I'm curious if this building will be to train soldiers (sword+shield+beer) or to promote them (gold coins)? Or both?

Here is the link to the thread: http://www.siedler25.org/index.php?com=forum&mod=forum&action=thread&id=843&start=1

Unfortunately the whole discussion is in German but you might try your luck with something like Google translator.

It will be used to promote your soldiers, because it can be really tedious to do so without one. This makes sense IMHO, because recruiting soldiers doesn't require as much micromanagement as promoting them does. Therefore it would make the game - if played with gold - much more enjoyable for people who don't like to do micromanaging a lot.

Zitat:

Too bad I don't have enough skills to make my own gfxs.

If you know anyone who has the necessary skills feel free to ask him/her. ;)

Two more advantages from Widelands:

- Manually changing capacity of military buildings. You are able to change the amount and type (weaker or stronger) of soldiers in each military building. In Widelands this works very simply and could be very useful in RttR especially on bigger maps. Now you would be able to decide where your generals should go and how many soldiers you need in each building.

- Dismantling buildings. We already have something similar in RttR 'refund materials' but now we must burn buildings which we don't need anymore to get back % of materials. Dismantling would be an alternative option. So you could choose to burn your building (and get nothing) or dismantle it and get some materials back. This is a cosmetic change but the animation of a builder slowly deconstructing the building looks very 'settlerish' and it is more realistic.

Two ideas about headquarters (they can't be implemented together IMO)

- Reconstructing Headquarters. You are able to build your headquarters, after you lose your first one (enemy destroys it). Because HQ is something more than storehouse.

- Capturing Headquarters. Let's treat HQ as a military building (because partially it is). Why destroy enemy HQ, when you can capture it and all the goods inside?

These two ideas can't be implemented together because it would lead to some ridiculous situations.

Im Ruhestand

Zitat:

- Reconstructing Headquarters. You are able to build your headquarters, after you lose your first one (enemy destroys it).
Because HQ is something more than storehouse.

If you mean "is totally useless" by saying "is something more than storehouse" then you are right - otherwise not.

Zitat:

- Capturing Headquarters. Let's treat HQ as a military building (because partially it is). Why destroy enemy HQ, when you can
capture it and all the goods inside?

What if I told you, that the defeated nation burns their own HQ just before enemys could capture it?

---

Zitat:

If you mean "is totally useless" by saying "is something more than storehouse" then you are right - otherwise not.

Prestige ;) But seriously, why not? Why not let you rebuild your HQ?

Zitat:

What if I told you, that the defeated nation burns their own HQ just before enemys could capture it?

Hope you are joking ;)

Im Ruhestand

Zitat:

Prestige ;) But seriously, why not? Why not let you rebuild your HQ?

Well - it's just useless, thats why, you could also just destroy some coins, same effect I guess. When you are normally playing there
are 2 things in your storehouses, maybe 3: building material (can be reproduced), food (can be reproduced), goldcoins (sad if you lose
them) - means most storehouses are just working as a buffer. In most cases when you lose your HQ you'll have other problems than
rebuilding a storehouse that can be directly destroyed but not as directly defended. Sure, you could just add lots of soldiers to your
reserver - but still, just having that HQ for... reasons. Well okay, some people may need that HQ but. Hm. I don't see any use ^^

Zitat:

Hope you are joking ;)

Not really - I guess that's what the intention is. When fighting for a military building, you kill the remaining soldiers - nobody left
to burn that building. But every other building could be burnt by the worker and I really think that thats the point behind those
fires- destorying buildings for blocking enemys. Guess thats also kinda working when I remember the beginning of that thread right?

---

Zitat:

Well - it's just useless, thats why, you could also just destroy some coins, same effect I guess. When you are normally playing there
are 2 things in your storehouses, maybe 3: building material (can be reproduced), food (can be reproduced), goldcoins (sad if you lose
them) - means most storehouses are just working as a buffer. In most cases when you lose your HQ you'll have other problems than
rebuilding a storehouse that can be directly destroyed but not as directly defended. Sure, you could just add lots of soldiers to your
reserver - but still, just having that HQ for... reasons. Well okay, some people may need that HQ but. Hm. I don't see any use ^^

It is not a very important building and somehow you are right but I also see nothing against that option. Maybe it is a cosmetic change but somehow also a logical one, because every country/town should have a capital/centre.

Zitat:

Not really - I guess that's what the intention is. When fighting for a military building, you kill the remaining soldiers - nobody left
to burn that building. But every other building could be burnt by the worker and I really think that thats the point behind those
fires- destorying buildings for blocking enemys. Guess thats also kinda working when I remember the beginning of that thread right?

HQ should not be treated strictly as a military building or strictly as a storehouse. It is an unique building which you couldn't destroy/burn by yourself and it should stay that way (even with that 'capturing HQ' option).

Editiert von Krugslayer am 17.11.2014 20:57

Im Ruhestand

Zitat:

HQ should not be treated strictly as a military building or strictly as a storehouse. It is an unique building which you
couldn't destroy/burn by yourself and it should stay that way (even with that 'capturing HQ' option).

Which would make the HQ an indestructible building which doesn't fit into the gameplay. Also 2000 years ago it was best
practice to destroy important buildings of an enslaved nation that nobody would ever remember their existence.

---

Zitat:

Which would make the HQ an indestructible building which doesn't fit into the gameplay

Ok, I get it. I have cool solution for this and maybe it would be even possible to combine rebuilding and capturing.

- You can't destroy your own HQ but you would be able to destroy conquered HQ. Which means if you capture enemy HQ, that building will be treated as your normal military building and you can destroy it immediately or after you took all the goods out of it (:D) or never, it depends on you.

- I'm not sure if this is possible but... Let's suppose that your own HQ was captured: you can't rebuild it because it still exists on a map, however if enemy destroys it, you would be able to do that.

EDIT: Honestly I don't care that much about rebuilding HQ but capturing HQ might be really useful, especially when you are running out of some wares (stones for example) and you would like to steal them from enemies. It make sense, especially if you combine this option with my previous proposition about capturing enemy buildings (not only the military one). This is realistic, because during the war opponent rarely burns everything in its path (except barbarians), he often takes control over existing buildings and goods.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 18.11.2014 13:01

Im Ruhestand

Okay so still: If i recapture my/an Other hq when I have none,am I able to destroy it or not?

Wouldn't such an addon make an attack harder then currently? You don't have to build a storehouse to catch soldiers
without base. You may get scouts to attack even faster. You can't be destroyed by enemy catapults. You may get
stone/boards to build catapults and attack faster without reorganizing.

These points may increase hq value but also kinda buff (in some cases) an attacking nation.

Those points just make me think if this is an addon that should be considered or not. Also you may write down those
concepts and report them as a wish - with detailed ideas how every addon is working,what happens in some special cases
etc.

---

Zitat:

Okay so still: If i recapture my/an Other hq when I have none,am I able to destroy it or not?

It should work like this: If you have one HQ - you can't destroy it, if you have more (because you captured it) - you can.

Zitat:

Wouldn't such an addon make an attack harder then currently? You don't have to build a storehouse to catch soldiers without base. You may get scouts to attack even faster. You can't be destroyed by enemy catapults. You may get stone/boards to build catapults and attack faster without reorganizing.

In my opinion this addon will not change attack that much. From my point of view this 'addon' (about headquarters but also the ability to choose if you want to destroy captured buildings or not) is somehow helpful for charburners and paved roads. Why? Because now: You are conquering enemy land, you are burning everything on your path and then you have to involve your own boards, stones, people, etc to build your own buildings on an empty field. If you capture enemy land with his buildings, you don't have to build anything. If you think that you don't need some buildings, you can burn them or dismantle them to get some materials back (or use the 'refund materials' as it works for now). So you will not only save your own boards and stones but you can also get some more building materials from enemy buildings. This means that you can spend more stones on paved roads (because with paved roads addon stones will be more valuable then before) or you might have more wood to use it in charburners.

Well, that's the theory. I could be wrong of course and these changes might affect gameplay in an unpredictable way, but there are 'nightly' versions to test some things, so if some addons can't be implemented because of various reasons, that's ok.

EDIT: And BTW some buildings should still be auto-destroyed. Those which are placed on borderlines. Because they could not be used anyway and they might cause bugs.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 18.11.2014 19:27

Zitat:

Also you may write down those concepts and report them as a wish - with detailed ideas how every addon is working,what happens in some special cases etc.

Done. Now you can find them on launchpad. I added some of the ideas discussed in this thread, because some were already there.

Hmm, after reading through all of the new posts, I pretty much agree with all the things Spike already told you.

Some thoughts about the destructible HQ idea:

I had this discussion with kaizerChiefs a few years ago and we both agreed that we would probably burn down our HQ as soon as it is emptied, because it is just a warehouse with two disadvantages: First, it can be attacked and second, it needs more space than a warehouse does.

Sure, you can defend it with soldiers, but on most maps you really want to have your soldiers on your front line so that nothing important gets destroyed (i.e. food & weapon production). And honestly, who really cares about something like prestige?

Also, in most of the multiplayer and even singleplayer games you are pretty much finished if your opponent manages to reach your HQ. By that time, it will be most likely that the majority of your soldiers are dead and most of your buildings are burnt to cinders.

I guess it is just my playing style, but still I feel it is worth mentioning: One of the first buildings I usually build is a warehouse as an emergency warehouse & for serf production. After it is finished, I usually start moving all the wares in my HQ to the warehouse. Making HQs able to be captured will only motivate players to just do that.

Another idea I really liked - but it was suggested ages ago - was raiding warehouses. So for example you can send some of your soldiers to an enemy warehouse and if they manage to defeat the guards they can take some of the wares back home.

Zitat:

And honestly, who really cares about something like prestige?

It was a joke ;)

Zitat:

Another idea I really liked - but it was suggested ages ago - was raiding warehouses. So for example you can send some of your soldiers to an enemy warehouse and if they manage to defeat the guards they can take some of the wares back home.

With my suggestion about capturing civilian buildings you might be able to steal everything ;) You might say 'but if opponent has a warehouse near frontiers, he will took all the goods out of it' - sure, but if you are going to conquer him anyway in the end there will be only one storehouse with everything inside. And if you are fighting against more than one opponent, the more valuable this booty gonna be. Human player will probably destroy that storehouse anyway, but in singleplayer game it might be really useful.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 20.11.2014 10:02

Zitat:

With my suggestion about capturing civilian buildings you might be able to steal everything ;)

Indeed, this might be a better idea than raiding warehouses. Although I think I won't be using it if it gets implemented because I usually have a very clear conception on how to build my settlement, since even captured military buildings annoy me :D

Few more ideas (some old, some new):

Animal Breeder house. A special building that would improve the spawnrate of animals. IMO animals should also require forest to spawn (at least some trees). So the Animal Breeder building should be build near trees and he would be able to support animals with food and water (but he should do it for free, so no wheat or water required). The more Animal Breeders -> the faster spawn of wild animals -> more hunter houses -> more meat. Finally it should be profitable to leave at least few trees on a map and finally you wouldn't have to burn your hunter house after a while.

Another idea about hunter and animals is to change the way Hunter House works. I think it would be logical to let hunter only hunts animals. The butcher in slaughterhouse should make a meat from them. We would have a second purpose for slaughterhouses. So this is only a cosmetic change but a realistic one, IMO.

And finally when the 'Settlers in boats' addon will be implemented (I hope so) we should also add 'Set boats speed' option, like for ships. Because now waterways might be really long (even unlimited) and we can have only one boatman on a waterway and we can't 'upgrade' waterways in any way. Boatmen are now too slow.

right now trees selected by the following code do produce animals:
produce_animals = (type < 3 || type > 5) && (INSTANCE_COUNTER % 20 == 0);
once every:
produce_animal_event = em->AddEvent(this, 6000 + RANDOM.Rand(__FILE__, __LINE__, obj_id, 2000), 3);

so for now you can just build foresters and hunters - but if you draw the required pictures for a new building Id add it as an optional building addon

Editiert von PoC am 21.11.2014 14:47

FYI, animals already spawn in forest areas in S2/RttR.

Im Ruhestand

As I already wrote to you Krug - it has been already mentioned and there are graphics done - I'm a bit upset that you didn't
link the discussions ( I know it's in German but that's not the point).

Here: http://www.siedler25.org/index.php?com=forum&mod=forum&action=thread&id=733

Here: http://www.siedler25.org/index.php?com=forum&mod=forum&action=thread&id=838

Gfxs: http://www.rfmonline.de/rttr/spike/futterkrippe.7z

Zitat:

Another idea about hunter and animals is to change the way Hunter House works. I think it would be logical to let
hunter only hunts animals. The butcher in slaughterhouse should make a meat from them. We would have a second
purpose for slaughterhouses. So this is only a cosmetic change but a realistic one, IMO.

As far as I can imagine such addon, it would totally slow down gameplay. Most maps are based on the same idea: you are
next to water and got fish,you are next to forests and got hunter. This is in most cases enough food to produce some
tools,some gold etc. changing this would cause slower starts but nothing else in my opinion.
It would only make sense if you could get skins from animals - maybe needed for generals instead of a coin (cape) but - well
- changing economy would destroy balance a lot in my opinion.

That's why I liked the idea of mangers - they are cheap,realistic,can be built on small spots,taking wheat to hunters and
those take them into mangers is also quite good looking.

If everything was modular and we had rttr2... It may becomes reality

---

Editiert von Spike am 21.11.2014 15:44

Zitat von Spike:

Gfxs[...]

Wow...why did i never hear of those. Adding implementing something for this to my to-do-list...

Im Ruhestand

Zitat:

Wow...why did i never hear of those. Adding implementing something for this to my to-do-list...

I know why, I know why, I know why - well, I think I know why. Those graphics were made 3-4 Years ago - I neither had a working
lstpacker (that 57 Tree has black background) and was working with the old s25viewer (which made some faults when extracting pictures).
Also those links are down and nobody ever talked about them again.

Still, you made me think about one point: I got those graphics but was always waiting until someone asks for them (a Dev who mentioned
that idea most likely) but - I may should upload all files in a seperate thread so we know which parts we already have for an openGFX.

I will make that post later today.

EDIT: Thread is online now - will add some how tos later.

---

Editiert von Spike am 21.11.2014 18:12

Zitat:

Here: http://www.siedler25.org/index.php?com=forum&mod=forum&action=thread&id=733

Here: http://www.siedler25.org/index.php?com=forum&mod=forum&action=thread&id=838

Gfxs: http://www.rfmonline.de/rttr/spike/futterkrippe.7z

Now this comes as a surprise. If I had known those discussions already exist, I would've linked them in my last post. Mangers definitely are a great idea that is realistic and makes sense in terms of gameplay mechanics. Although since animals automatically spawn in forests it isn't really needed IMHO.

Zitat:

If everything was modular and we had rttr2... It may becomes reality

Well, hope dies last :D

Editiert von Quorzom am 21.11.2014 16:53

Zitat:

animals already spawn in forest areas in S2/RttR.

Now I know (thanks to Spike). So I think we should improve the spawnrate of animals a little bit. Thanks to that it might be finally profitable to leave a forest instead of cutting down all the trees.

Zitat:

I'm a bit upset that you didn't link the discussions

I thought that everybody knows about it already and I'm just a new guy ;)

Zitat:

It would only make sense if you could get skins from animals - maybe needed for generals instead of a coin (cape) but - well - changing economy would destroy balance a lot in my opinion.

So you are talking about Tannery (mentioned by me before). Not sure if this gonna work but its an interesting idea. So the promotion from officer to general would require gold coin and kind of a leather armor (from animals). Thanks to that general could be a little stronger (+2 hit points instead of 1, so 8hp overall, instead of 7). I'm just thinking out loud :D

Zitat:

Now I know (thanks to Spike). So I think we should improve the spawnrate of animals a little bit. Thanks to that it might be finally profitable to leave a forest instead of cutting down all the trees.

It's already profitable if the forest is large enough. Try the map "Dem Berg nach" and you'll see what I mean. Besides, it makes sense that building farms is more profitable than just hunting. That's why humans developed agriculture in the first place.

Zitat:

So you are talking about Tannery

I agree with Spike that this would most likely destroy the economy/balancing. Although I have an idea how that might work: Instead of changing the whole recruiting method, why not introduce an extra rank like a 2 star general that has something like 10 HP, but needs to be outfitted with leather armour which is made in the tannery. On the other hand, it's really complicated and perhaps not worth the effort. And there are a lot of open questions like:

Do you want an extra building which makes skins out of pigs or are they produced by pig farms?

Where do you upgrade the general? In a any military building like you do with any other rank or in a separate building?

Does the tannery produce leather or leather armour out of the pig skins? If not, you'll need yet another building, hence a lot of gfx work.

Zitat:

Instead of changing the whole recruiting method, why not introduce an extra rank like a 2 star general

Why making a new rank when you can use the existing one?

Zitat:

Do you want an extra building which makes skins out of pigs or are they produced by pig farms?

From my point of view: Tannery should be a building where you could produce leather armour for generals from pigs and (if that is possible) also from wild animals. So we should rather change the way hunter works, not a pig farm.

Zitat:

Where do you upgrade the general? In a any military building like you do with any other rank or in a separate building?

Hm, no special building needed. 'Training camp' is coming (hopefully) and I think that's enough.

Zitat:

Does the tannery produce leather or leather armour out of the pig skins? If not, you'll need yet another building, hence a lot of gfx work.

Leather armour. Just lets make it the simplest way possible, so with only one new building (Tannery), one new ware (leather armour), one new profession (tanner), new tool (hm... not sure here) and no new 'extra rank', that's not necessary IMO.

Zitat:

Hm, no special building needed. 'Training camp' is coming (hopefully) and I think that's enough.

Sorry but that's bullshit, addons with dependencies don't make any sense. What if I don't like to use the training camp but want to play with the tannery? The training camp is far from finished if you'd looked at the thread I linked a couple of days ago.

Zitat:

Why making a new rank when you can use the existing one?

Why do you insist in changing proven game mechanics? It worked well the way it is for almost 20 years. If you don't like it, play something else.

Zitat:

Leather armour. Just lets make it the simplest way possible, so with only one new building (Tannery), one new ware (leather armour), one new profession (tanner), new tool (hm... not sure here) and no new 'extra rank', that's not necessary IMO.

This still means 10 new building graphics (2 for each people - winter and standard). And that's just for the finished building. On top of that: adding a new tool (needs to be added to toolmaking window, storehouse window etc.), a few new graphics for the tanner and a working animation. Quite a lot of effort for altering the way you produce generals which IMHO will most likely just ruin the game.

Zitat:

Sorry but that's bullshit, addons with dependencies don't make any sense. What if I don't like to use the training camp but want to play with the tannery?

I totally didn't mean what you said. I mean that a training camp is coming (lots of work, as you said) so why we should build yet another special military building for yet another addon? Wanna play with tannery without training camp? No problem, we should just add special icons to military buildings (icons for leather armour).

Zitat:

Why do you insist in changing proven game mechanics? It worked well the way it is for almost 20 years. If you don't like it, play something else.

What I was trying to say is that making a new rank is yet another additional extra work. New rank and what? Making a new military unit, new animations for each race, etc? This doesn't make sense to me, waste of time.

Zitat:

I mean that a training camp is coming

I think you don't get it. It will be an optional addon like every other addon in RttR.

Zitat:

New rank and what?

http://www.siedler25.org/index.php?com=forum&mod=forum&action=thread&id=1292&start=8#13073

Zitat:

This doesn't make sense to me, waste of time.

1 soldier unit is a waste of time, but 10 new building graphics & more are not? Nice logic :D

Zitat:

we should just add special icons to military buildings (icons for leather armour)

See? No need for a training camp. I'm glad you finally realized that.

Editiert von Quorzom am 21.11.2014 22:18

Zitat:

I think you don't get it. It will be an optional addon like every other addon in RttR.

Yes, I know that ;) Well indeed the way I wrote that could be confusing for you. I will surely use Training Camp when it will be ready, that's why ;)

Zitat:

http://www.siedler25.org/index.php?com=forum&mod=forum&action=thread&id=1292&start=8#13073

So you are comparing new military rank to tanner? Well there is a difference. New military rank is something rather unnecessary (from my point of view), fighting animations etc are hard to implement. While Tannery would be a new production line, something fresh, new to the game. Somehow an improvement (IMO of course ;) )

Editiert von Krugslayer am 21.11.2014 22:25

No, no, no I linked it because you said it yourself:

Zitat:

So you are talking about Tannery (mentioned by me before). Not sure if this gonna work but its an interesting idea. So the promotion from officer to general would require gold coin and kind of a leather armor (from animals). Thanks to that general could be a little stronger (+2 hit points instead of 1, so 8hp overall, instead of 7). I'm just thinking out loud :D

I was just elaborating the requirements for this:

Zitat:

This still means 10 new building graphics (2 for each people - winter and standard). And that's just for the finished building. On top of that: adding a new tool (needs to be added to toolmaking window, storehouse window etc.), a few new graphics for the tanner and a working animation. Quite a lot of effort for altering the way you produce generals which IMHO will most likely just ruin the game.

Since you are quite new to the community, let me explain something:

It's a sad story, but it might take some time - weeks if you are lucky, years if you are not - until any of your suggestions get implemented (due to the lack of active developers & people who can do gfx and so on), so I'd suggest waiting a few weeks/months/years until some of the work required for implementing this is done. Then we can continue talking about it.

Oh I see now. Well I think we should ask Spike what is harder: making new gfx for building or animation for soldier :P

BTW

Zitat:

1 soldier unit is a waste of time, but 10 new building graphics & more are not? Nice logic :D

Rather 5 soldier units + animations ;)

Zitat:

It's a sad story, but it might take some time - weeks if you are lucky, years if you are not - until any of your suggestions get implemented (due to the lack of active developers & people who can do gfx and so on), so I'd suggest waiting a few weeks/months/years until some of the work required for implementing this is done. Then we can continue talking about it.

You don't have to mention it, I can clearly see that. I'm not even sure whether I'll be still playing this game when for example Temple will be finally finished :P But I guess that wasn't the point of this thread. It was rather the wish to share the ideas and opinions about the game. If not me, someone else will use some of the addons mentioned here.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 21.11.2014 23:31

Krugslayer is right on this one...a new building is just a tiny fraction in terms of amount of work required compared to a new soldier, which would require dozens if not hundreds of new images.

Both new buildings and new settlers (be it workers or soldiers) are decent ideas, you just need to have in mind the effort it takes to implement a specific feature. That being said, even large-effort ideas are a good thing which if you get people enthusiasticly enough about may get added to the game.

Also, there is really no need for hostility - this thread should be for brainstorming, fighting over how exactly something should be implemented isnt getting us anywhere, especially as long as we are talking about ideas rather than code/gfx.

Edit: And, bear in mind you dont have to stick to the original S2. Ideas are free, so dont hesitate using this freedom and have your imagination run wild if you want to. There are several people here who frown upon almost any deviaton from the original S2, but dont let your phantasy be limited by those.

Editiert von qUiXui am 21.11.2014 23:14

Im Ruhestand

Zitat:

Krugslayer is right on this one...a new building is just a tiny fraction in terms of amount of work required compared to a new
soldier, which would require dozens if not hundreds of new images.

1 Soldier = 5*(6*8+1*8+3*8) = 472 graphics for a complete new rank
1 Building = 5 * (2*5-3) ) = 35 graphics for a complete new building

But size of a Soldier graphic is not as large as a building graphic.

Zitat:

[...] There are several people here who frown upon almost any deviaton from the original S2, but dont let your phantasy be
limited by those.

And some people try to keep the game as consistent as possible - nobody wants to end up like widelands which just feels completly
diffrent from the original.

---

Editiert von Spike am 22.11.2014 09:35

I feel responsible for a little bit of a mess in this thread, so please let me explain few things.

I don't feel attacked, but I am surprised about how emotionally some of you react. Maybe what I wrote earlier might be confusing to some of you. Maybe I should say it in another words. But let's make one thing clear:

Every suggestion proposed by me in this thread should be optional. I never said that I want to change the main game in any way.

I don't understand comments like:

Zitat:

Why do you insist in changing proven game mechanics? It worked well the way it is for almost 20 years. If you don't like it, play something else.

Zitat:

nobody wants to end up like widelands which just feels completly diffrent from the original.

Guys... when everything is optional, how could I change this game to Widelands? Please... :)

You don't like the idea about (for example) Tannery? You think it would ruin the game? Fine, then do not activate it. I mean, why you feel so upset when everything could be on/off in options? Why everybody should play this game the way you want? If someone might have a crazy idea to add space ship to this game, let him do it. If someone want to make another starcraft-like game, let him do it. Why would you care, when you could still play this game the way you want?

So please, do not try to impute that I want to change this game to Widelands or something like that. All I can do is to suggest some ideas, and that's all. I am not taking control of this game and I'm not saying 'now everybody has to use Tannery! <evil_laugh>' ;) Just try to understand that some people might have other visions about this game. Looks like at least qUiXui understands that.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 22.11.2014 13:33

Im Ruhestand

- This is no post -
(Still can't delete posts :<)

---

Editiert von Spike am 22.11.2014 14:20

added a new addon: more animals
allows the user to adjust the percentage of trees that spawn animals(default,+50%,+100%,+200%,+500%,+1000%)
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~parasiteofchar/s25rttr/AIpoc2/revision/9498

Sounds fair to me :)

Please don't forget that for new production buildings, you'll also need a new worker unit & working animations for that building. So the number of total gfx work should be larger than that in Spike's calculation. Nonetheless, it was just a small suggestion that I came up with while replying to Krugslayers post. I didn't really think much about it.

Zitat:

You don't like the idea about (for example) Tannery?

I never meant I don't like the idea in general. I simply didn't like the suggestion on how it'll work (i.e making skins out of game instead of pigs), and that's what this thread is for: discussing new addons & find the best way to implement them in terms of work required and of course balancing. People have different opinions, so discussing the way how it could work is really essential.

Zitat:

And some people try to keep the game as consistent as possible - nobody wants to end up like widelands which just feels completly
diffrent from the original.

I totally agree. The main reason I'm playing RttR instead of Widelands is that it stays close to the original. Even most of the addons in current versions of the game don't change that. In Widelands, you end up guessing how much of any building you'll need. An example: even pro players of Widelands don't know exactly how many farms you'll need for one bakery. It really isn't thought out well in terms of balancing. And I don't want that to happen with RttR.

Additionally, one should always keep game balancing in mind. Yes, all proposed addons are optional, but nobody will have fun playing with an addon that completely destroys it. In my opinion some of the proposed ideas will just do that, others will work fine the way they were proposed. Anyway, in order to improve said ideas, one has to find a middle way that keeps all the pros & cons about any idea in mind. If you have another opinion, please explain why you think so and give some constructive criticism. Simply disregarding it won't help in this discussions.

Most of the addons currently in the game are very good IMHO, because they add convenience (tool ordering, disable coins per default, military aid), alternative ways to produce resources (the charburner, inexhaustible granite mines) or things which make the game easier for beginners (refunding materials, inexhaustible mines, playing without gold and so on).

added a new addon: burn duration
allows the user to adjust for how long buildings will burn when they get destroyed (default (3700 frames),-25%,-50%,-75%,-90%)
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~parasiteofchar/s25rttr/AIpoc2/revision/9499

Zitat:

I simply didn't like the suggestion on how it'll work (i.e making skins out of game instead of pigs)

Very well. It is not a bad idea, just keep in mind that if you'd like to combine it with Temple addon (theoretically) you might have a problem. You might have 3 purposes for pig farms.
But generally we could try it to work that way: Pig Farm -> Tannery -> Leather Armour -> Military building (or Training camp, if that addon would be activated)

Zitat:

The main reason I'm playing RttR instead of Widelands is that it stays close to the original.

Ok, I understand that. Personally I like the idea of making this game more complicated. I like the ideas of new production lines, new buildings, even new mines. Of course I agree that it should be done with the necessary care of balance. But generally I am open for experimentations.

Zitat:

added a new addon: burn duration allows the user to adjust for how long buildings will burn when they get destroyed (default (3700 frames),-25%,-50%,-75%,-90%)

Yet another addon that I like :)

Unmovable allied borders.
Sometimes when I play on a single player I am irritated by the fact that your own ally can steal part of your land and even burn some of your buildings. This is almost like a friendly fire. This IMO should be fixed and allies shall no more steal each other's land. Enemies will still be able to do that. Opinions?

One more suggestion about AI. I think it would be good to change the way AI is using Military options. Now they are not increasing the number of their soldiers in Interior/Centre regions of their country. That's why it is easy to overpower them. AI with 3 mints will have less generals than me with two mints, because they keep having only 1 soldier in their military buildings (even in fortresses). Because of that I am almost always stronger than AI, even if it has more gold and AI (even if more aggressive overall) is not really that challenging.

Zitat:

Unmovable allied borders.
Sometimes when I play on a single player I am irritated by the fact that your own ally can steal part of your land and even burn some of your buildings. This is almost like a friendly fire. This IMO should be fixed and allies shall no more steal each other's land. Enemies will still be able to do that. Opinions?

new addon: Improved alliance
Allied players can no longer push back your borders with new military buildings

Zitat:

new addon: Improved alliance
Allied players can no longer push back your borders with new military buildings

:-) <beer>

So, improved alliance addon isn't included in the latest nightly build. Because of bugs?

Im Ruhestand

Zitat:

So, improved alliance addon isn't included in the latest nightly build. Because of bugs?

causing crashes,
needs to be fixed first.

---

Ok, I understand.

I uploaded a new version that might fix the issues with the addon - if spike (or someone else) finds time to test this version and finds no problems it might be added soon™.

Editiert von PoC am 29.11.2014 20:27

there is still a problem so it will take a while longer

Editiert von PoC am 30.11.2014 14:57

It seems to me that Improved Alliance is working quite fine now. (Revision 9529)

Editiert von Krugslayer am 05.12.2014 20:06

Flexible Mines Depletion. It would be cool to let the player choose how soon mines will be exhausted. For me personally mines are depleting too fast but playing with Inexhaustible Mines is too boring. Same option could be available for fishes.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 12.12.2014 13:53

so something like 100%(default),75%(new),50%(new),25%(new),10%(new),0%(endless mines) chance to use resources(not food but raw resources from the terrain) when generating ore?

Editiert von PoC am 13.12.2014 15:09

Well, I thought about something like:

25% of resources
50% of resources
75% of resources
100% of resources (default amount of ore, this is how it is right now in the game)
200% of resources
300% of resources
500% of resources

Because some might prefer to play with greater amount of resources (slower depletion), others might like to play with lesser amount of resources (faster depletion). This solution could be implemented to mines (and maybe fishes).

The AI shouldn't put as many soldiers next to habour buildings if sea attack is turned off.

Zitat:

The AI shouldn't put as many soldiers next to habour buildings if sea attack is turned off.

done!

It would be even better to expand my latest idea (Flexible Mines Depletion) to single types of mines. For example you would be able to set gold mines to 200%, coal to 300% and iron to 500%. It would help a lot on maps with uneven resources. Not sure if this can be done like that, but in theory it looks great.

Hi guys,

i just wanna make a suggestion for the spanish names of the buildings etc. There are in "latino" so for spanish
people sounds quite weird those words, i suggest to put the original names of the settlers 2 in spanish.

Im Ruhestand

You can edit any language: https://translations.launchpad.net/s25rttr

---

Now we have winter and it is a good time for playing on wintermaps in RttR. However my favourite maps were made on greenland. So recently I thought about the possibility to convert greenland maps to winterland maps and vice versa. It would be cool to play certain map in two or three (wasteland) different ways.

Im Ruhestand

Try Xasers Editor.

---

I know that I can do that manually but I was rather talking about a complex option implemented to the game, so the game could automatically recognize which version I want to play. So every map could be played in 3 different landscapes. Because remaking manually every map in RttR would be very... time absorbing. Remaking every map to different landscape doesn't make sense, but if it can be done in faster and more 'tricky' way, it would be great. Just a random thought.

Some random ideas.

1. Improved Diplomacy/Trade Territory

How it should work: You are able to trade part of your territory (one part is one military building + nearest area) to any player you want - ally or enemy.

Why ally: Imagine that part of the ally territory was conquered by enemy. Then you are conquering enemy territory and you are reclaiming ally military buildings. You might like to give your ally his previous territory, why:
- because you are not able to control huge empire (not enough soldiers)
- you want to make him stronger (to help you later)

Why enemy: Imagine that you are tired of war and you simply want to make a peace (diplomacy option). But sometimes peace has a price. For example one part (one military building + nearest area) or more.

2. Retreat

How it should work: Sometimes during the attack on enemy building you might change your mind. Simply click on an icon (on attacked military building) to send your soldiers back to their buildings.

Why: Sometimes during the attack you might realize that it would be batter to retreat than fight till death - if enemy is too strong or/and you are attacked in other place. (retreat should be impossible if your soldiers are already in a battle and they are surrounded by enemy soldiers)

3. Change the range of attack of soldiers

How it should work: You are able to change the range of your soldiers. Literally it means that your soldiers could attack even from buildings that are very far from enemy borders/attacking building. Or you could do the opposite and shorten the range of soldiers. It would be up to you.

If in your opinion some of these ideas sound cool to you, think about adding them to the game ;)

Editiert von Krugslayer am 07.09.2015 20:19

1. needs a button a menu to pick the new owner and then just capture the building: question what happens to the soldiers in the
building - switch owner as well or do they just run away and if they run away how to prevent the building from being owned by
the new player without a soldier inside?

2. could use the bulding is captured by ally/ and already full to abort the attack and send the attackers home

3. uh that might be possible but then the game has to check the pathing for figures from all buildings on the map up to the new
range and that will probably lag horribly if the range is much bigger than it is right now

Zitat:

question what happens to the soldiers in the building - switch owner as well or do they just run away and if they run away how to prevent the building from being owned by the new player without a soldier inside?

Well I guess it would be easier for that soldier to just switch his nationality. Otherwise it might cause some problems.
But on the other hand... maybe ally should reclaim his military building and territory and the other soldier should just leave that building like its burned/captured by ally/full and should evacuate to nearest storehouse. That abandoned building would be empty for a short time until ally soldier would appear but should be also unable to be conquered by others (like it was just build).

EDIT: Not sure if this was mentioned before but in my opinion buildings such as woodcutter or hunter should also inform you when they are out of their resources (wood or wild animals) not only quarry or fishery.

Editiert von Krugslayer am 13.09.2015 18:23

Hi guys¡

I just have find this page (archive.org), which is actually an online library in which the people upload not just
only books but music, pictures and the most interest thing for us, software. I found out that people can upload
ms-dos games and there is a quite aceptable collection so i suggest to upload this game and put a link to this
page in the description so more people could find this game.

---
Euskalerria

Im Ruhestand

No. That's illegal.

Settlers is owned by ubisoft (they also own bb) and they still sell the game. That's why no link to any copy is allowed in this
forum.

---

I have 5 ideas:

+ charburner need 5 woods for 1 coal (you need ~ 5 kg of wood to make 1 kg of charcoal)
+ click military building (or new icon) to display range of this building (range on terrain - maybe like new border)
+ when clicking 'C' - add information about houses for example:
  - Storehouse #1, Storehouse #2 etc. (really useful for bigger maps)
+ display only the name of the building of the same type for example (similar to key 'C' function showing the name of all buildings):
  - when we play on high resolutions and we zoom out we may see buildings of the same type (how far it is between the buildings for example: what is distance between Storehouse #1 & Storehouse #2)
  - anyway maybe it could be done by change font's color ie. click 'C' for all names and button for "the same type"
    then all names become grey and only "the same type" stay yellow.
+ "zoomed in" option for all in-game windows (good for hi-res)

Editiert von luk3Z am 29.07.2017 09:08

Im Ruhestand

Zitat:

+ charburner need 5 woods for 1 coal (you need ~ 5 kg of wood to make 1 kg of charcoal)

Well the current idea is to use a food resource (wheat) to create coal. You need more wheat than by just creating food and mine coal

Zitat:

+ click military building (or new icon) to display range of this building (range on terrain - maybe like new border)

You may add a addon request https://github.com/Return-To-The-Roots/s25client/issues

Zitat:

+ when clicking 'C' - add information about houses for example:
- Storehouse #1, Storehouse #2 etc. (really useful for bigger maps)

Any further examples or you you just want to distinguish storehouses? For what reason?

Zitat:

+ display only the name of the building of the same type for example (similar to key 'C' function showing the name of all
buildings):
- when we play on high resolutions and we zoom out we may see buildings of the same type (how far it is between the buildings for
example: what is distance between Storehouse #1 & Storehouse #2)

Asking again, what is it good for? in your example there are only two storehouses, what happens when you got like 20 wells (on a large
map) and where should those distances be displayed and what is it good for?

Zitat:

+ "zoomed in" option for all in-game windows (good for hi-res)

What about just saying UI scaling?
Although I'm sure the next question is scaled buildings etc. thus you may just use a lower resolution on fullscreen.

---

Zitat:

Any further examples or you you just want to distinguish storehouses? For what reason?

Zitat:

Asking again, what is it good for? in your example there are only two storehouses, what happens when you got like 20 wells (on a large
map) and where should those distances be displayed and what is it good for?

For better management and gameplay on bigger maps. When you max. zoom out then name on the same buildings will be blinking when you pressing key. Now you have approximate distance between buildings.
On bigger maps this is the mess with all this buildings.
So, for exampe if you have 10 or 20 storehouses [warehouses] (or other builings) you can link (associate) #+number with topography and neighbour buildings when using new optin "go to next warehouse" or "go to next building".

Example:
I need more swords & shields, so I have to know what's going on with Armory & Iron Smelter.
Near Storehouse #12 I have 5 Armory & Iron Smelter but I don't remember where are they on this big map...
So I click on any Storehouse and go to #12.

Editiert von luk3Z am 31.07.2017 15:53

Im Ruhestand

So, it's nearly the same as just taking a look at stored swords / shields, isn't it? How do you manage creating soldiers, do you just
build a storehouse and hope that beer and weapons are stored in the same storehouse?
I rather stop storing beer / weapons in any new storehouse or hit collect all in one storehouse. That way I don't need to remember
which storehouse is the correct one.

What about not unsing generic #numbers but having a field where you could add a maybe 16 chars string?

So if its empty, the building is storehouse, if you type asd then its storehouse - asd or you type water then its storehouse - water.

Maybe that fits your needs a bit better, doesnt it?

---

What do you think about a "jump list" ?
So, if there will be numbering of buildings you can type "storehouse #12" to go for this location.
Anyway your idea is also really good but I don't know what is easier to implement: jump list or "text label field" (probably new button for label also needed).

Im Ruhestand

Hm, how about a new window with a list of buildings that have user labels? That way you can find them really quick and you got a nice
list (maybe you can also remove labels here).
Guess thats a quite nice feature, maybe open a addon request on github

---


Username:
Security code:
Security code:
Text:	b i u img code list eng ger
	Convert smilies like :), ;) etc. into small graphics?
	Convert WWW-addresses into clickable links?
	Soll Boardcode in ihrer Nachricht aktiviert werden?

Forum

Krugslayer am 27.10.2014 15:00 #12948

qUiXui am 27.10.2014 18:26 #12949

Krugslayer am 27.10.2014 21:32 #12950

qUiXui am 28.10.2014 09:31 #12951

Krugslayer am 28.10.2014 13:53 #12952

qUiXui am 28.10.2014 14:34 #12953

Spike am 28.10.2014 15:45 #12954

qUiXui am 28.10.2014 17:27 #12955

Spike am 28.10.2014 18:04 #12956

Krugslayer am 28.10.2014 18:47 #12957

Krugslayer am 29.10.2014 13:06 #12960

qUiXui am 30.10.2014 16:37 #12961

Spike am 30.10.2014 17:57 #12962

Krugslayer am 31.10.2014 18:24 #12966

Spike am 01.11.2014 19:28 #12971

Krugslayer am 01.11.2014 22:22 #12972

Spike am 02.11.2014 10:56 #12973

qUiXui am 02.11.2014 11:11 #12974

Quorzom am 03.11.2014 18:41 #12978

Zitat:

Zitat:

Zitat:

Zitat:

Zitat:

Zitat:

Krugslayer am 03.11.2014 20:34 #12980

Zitat:

Zitat:

Spike am 04.11.2014 07:51 #12981

Zitat:

Zitat:

Krugslayer am 04.11.2014 10:10 #12982

Zitat:

Spike am 04.11.2014 17:10 #12985

Zitat:

Zitat:

qUiXui am 04.11.2014 17:49 #12986

Zitat von Spike:

qUiXui am 04.11.2014 20:46 #12987

Spike am 04.11.2014 22:50 #12988

qUiXui am 04.11.2014 23:05 #12989

Spike am 04.11.2014 23:21 #12990

Quorzom am 05.11.2014 03:45 #12992

Spike am 05.11.2014 07:08 #12993

Krugslayer am 08.11.2014 22:48 #12994

Spike am 09.11.2014 16:02 #12995

Quorzom am 09.11.2014 19:28 #12996

Zitat:

Krugslayer am 09.11.2014 21:03 #12998

Quorzom am 09.11.2014 23:16 #12999

qUiXui am 10.11.2014 08:52 #13000

Krugslayer am 11.11.2014 13:12 #13001

Quorzom am 11.11.2014 17:21 #13003

Krugslayer am 11.11.2014 17:53 #13004

Zitat:

Quorzom am 11.11.2014 19:02 #13005

Krugslayer am 11.11.2014 20:17 #13006

Zitat:

Quorzom am 11.11.2014 20:53 #13007

qUiXui am 11.11.2014 21:19 #13008

Krugslayer am 12.11.2014 18:31 #13009

Zitat:

Quorzom am 12.11.2014 19:47 #13010

Krugslayer am 12.11.2014 20:36 #13011

Quorzom am 12.11.2014 21:01 #13012

Krugslayer am 12.11.2014 21:38 #13013

Spike am 12.11.2014 22:32 #13014

Zitat:

Zitat:

Zitat:

Quorzom am 12.11.2014 22:48 #13015

Krugslayer am 13.11.2014 19:34 #13016

Zitat:

Zitat:

Quorzom am 14.11.2014 23:21 #13017

Zitat:

Zitat:

Zitat:

Zitat: