Page 10 of 179
PostPosted: 24 Nov 2011, 22:44
by CuDi
Couldn't agree more. Maybe they could use a change up! I was thinking putting the image of a lance carrier on top of the horse rather than the "thief"/miliia. Would be pretty interesting. He could hold his lance forward as if he were some sort of jouster.
PostPosted: 24 Nov 2011, 22:51
by GreatWhiteBear
Yes call it the scout, and call the scout the cavalry.
I'd say he looks like a scout and the scout doesn't look like a scout.
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2011, 01:42
by Lewin
New units need hundreds of sprites for the animations. (every animation frame for walking and fighting in 8 directions) If someone makes professional ones we'll use them, but only if they match the KaM style perfectly and don't just look like a photoshop job putting two sprites together.
GWB: I agree with your name change suggestions, but I don't think I'm comfortable changing so much. I'll never be able to stop calling "cavalry" scouts and I think others will be the same. And it might be more complicated for translations which already call knights cavalry.
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2011, 09:03
by T*AnTi-V!RuZz
Start post updated
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2011, 09:52
by Encaitar
I don?t agree changing the name of the Vagebond. He looks like a raider/thief, so his name fits perfectly! Changing his clothes because his name is not kingly is too much work, plus seems silly too me.
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2011, 09:58
by T*AnTi-V!RuZz
I don?t agree changing the name of the Vagebond. He looks like a raider/thief, so his name fits perfectly! Changing his clothes because his name is not kingly is too much work, plus seems silly too me.
I think what Lewin means, is that a king would never have something like a Vagabond in his army..
"A vagabond is a drifter and an itinerant wanderer who roams wherever they please, following the whim of the moment."
The king's men aren't really 'drifters' or 'itinerant wanderers'..
He's looking for a name that would fit in a king's army.
The part I do agree with you is the 'look' of the Vagabond. Changing the name won't change the way he looks (like a raider/thief), and we all know we can't create new units atm.
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2011, 12:43
by Lewin
Yes, my point was that a king might hire a raider/thief/wanderer to help him in a battle, but why would he make one of his own men (a recruit) into such a person? Why would he equip a guy with an axe and horse and then call him a "vagabond"? That doesn't sound right to me.
We won't be changing the appearance of the unit, it's way too hard.
I think we can ignore the fact that he looks like a raider/thief, he looks just like a militia on horseback and no one thinks the militia looks inappropriate in a king's army. My only real objection is to the name, the appearance is less of an issue to me.
@Tom: Could you please move this item: "Move Vagabond from Town Hall to Barracks as a trainable unit " to the "Open for discussion" section? It's not decided yet due to the issues we are discussing now. Also I'm not sure what that section "Market" is doing. It has one thing relating to the market and one thing relating only to the barracks
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2011, 12:46
by T*AnTi-V!RuZz
@Tom: Could you please move this item: "Move Vagabond from Town Hall to Barracks as a trainable unit " to the "Open for discussion" section? It's not decided yet due to the issues we are discussing now. Also I'm not sure what that section "Market" is doing. It has one thing relating to the market and one thing relating only to the barracks
Fixed
Edit:
btw, I don't really think there's another suitable name for him.. Remember the chat we had with a couple of people on the IRC? We came up with a few names, but none of them were really appropriate.
The easiest would still be altering all the names of the mounted units:
- Vagabond -> Scout
- Scout -> Knight
- Knight ->
Cataphract / Paladin
The downside to this would be people still using their old names which would cause confusion amongst players. Still, I see no other suitable option.
The name 'Cavalry' isn't suitable in my eyes, either. I mean, the Scout and the Knight are cavalry too. It's more like a collective noun..
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2011, 12:57
by The Dark Lord
I wouldn't like to see the vagabond in the barracks in the first place. When you don't need leather or iron to recruit cavalry it will be very easy to have access to cavalry units which have many tactical advantages. Since they are fast, it is hard to stop them from scouting your village if you don't have cavalry either. If you can train vagabonds in your barracks you can train cavalry pretty fast in the beginning and thus it will be harder to prevent enemies from scouting your village.
I've always considered cavalry units a bit special because it is indeed not easy to train them, and I'd love to keep it that way.
PostPosted: 25 Nov 2011, 13:53
by Lewin
@Tom: The scout is not a Knight. Knights do not use axes (lances or swords) so I really disagree with your naming suggestions. Also I don't think the names should be changed around so much when they've been in use for 13 years. You are right about cavalry, although I don't think that means we can't use it. (bowmen is a collective noun, it should really be longbowmen)
@The Dark Lord: Thanks for your opinion. I thought this might make multiplayer interesting because we'd see more use of cavalry in multiplayer. (they're not very common atm) The initial rushing could be a problem, but peace time can fix that because rushing with militia is also hard to defend against. (but you are right that mounted units would be worse because they're faster)
PostPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 19:09
by Danjb
Interesting discussion... I'm not actually sure what I think about the idea of moving the Vagabond to the Barracks.
I think my only reservation is what The Dark Lord said; I still think they'll be quite "special", as the Stables is never a high-priority building for me and therefore I'm still unlikely to get these units early on in the game, but it would make cavalry very easy to get...
I don't think the graphics are a problem since, as you said, they just look like Militia on horseback.
Finally, regarding the name change, it shouldn't be too hard to come up with a new name
A few quick ideas:
Cavalry
Horseman
Rider
Outrider
Mounted Guard
Mounted Militia
Corn? Seriously?
PostPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 19:15
by Garnu_Thorn
This I believe was a long standing language misinterpretation even in TPR. Corn didn't exist in the Medieval Age up until Columbus and the rest of the explorers brought corn to Europe. So why is corn in K&M under the English translation? It looks like wheat. Although you can make bread with corn, you usually use wheat. Maybe the original programmers didn't translate it right.
So my request is to change all mentions of corn to wheat, for accurate labeling in the English language and for accuracy in the age this game is in. If you don't want to call it wheat, what about grain?
PostPosted: 27 Nov 2011, 20:10
by GreatWhiteBear
corn also means just grains.
Otherwise just translate it to grain.
Re: Corn? Seriously?
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2011, 00:02
by Lewin
This I believe was a long standing language misinterpretation even in TPR. Corn didn't exist in the Medieval Age up until Columbus and the rest of the explorers brought corn to Europe. So why is corn in K&M under the English translation? It looks like wheat. Although you can make bread with corn, you usually use wheat. Maybe the original programmers didn't translate it right.
So my request is to change all mentions of corn to wheat, for accurate labeling in the English language and for accuracy in the age this game is in. If you don't want to call it wheat, what about grain?
"Corn" is the American English word, "wheat" is the English (Great Britain) word. We have used the original translation from KaM which was a US translation, not a UK translation. To be honest "corn" has kind of stuck for me so I don't know whether I'd like to see it change. If we did this we should change ALL of the American words to English words, e.g. "color" -> "colour". I don't think it matter much, most people know what it means. (we're all used to living in a world of crazy American spelling here
)
In America they call "corn" "maize". (the stuff Columbus brought back to Europe)
Actually, I just noticed that you're from America!
I was under the impression that in America you always called "wheat" -> "corn" and "corn" -> "maize". Or am I wrong? Is it just some states?
PostPosted: 28 Nov 2011, 07:39
by GreatWhiteBear
I thought corn was the American word for the English word maize or grains.
I think Lewin might actually be wrong...
Wait whut?