All Activity

Zempira: natuurlijke ondersteuning voor gewichtsverlies en darmgezondheid Zempira Gewichtsverlies draait niet alleen om minder eten en meer bewegen. Ook verzadiging, spijsvertering en de conditie van het darmmicrobioom spelen een belangrijke rol binnen een gezonde leefstijl. Zempira is ontwikkeld als voedingssupplement voor mensen die hun dagelijkse aanpak rondom gewichtsbeheersing willen ondersteunen. De formule richt zich vooral op de darmomgeving en combineert onder andere inuline, aardappelzetmeel en verschillende bacteriestammen. Volgens de beschikbare productinformatie bevat één capsule 20 mg inuline, 75 mg aardappelzetmeel en een combinatie van bacteriestammen met in totaal 4 miljard CFU per capsule. Wat is Zempira? Slim Coffee Booster Zempira is een voedingssupplement in capsulevorm dat wordt gepositioneerd als ondersteuning bij gewichtsbeheersing en een gezonde darmflora. In tegenstelling tot producten die uitsluitend op stimulatie of cafeïne zijn gebaseerd, richt deze Zempira-formule zich op ingrediënten die verband houden met de darmomgeving. De formule bevat onder meer inuline uit cichorei en aardappelzetmeel, ingrediënten die als voedingsbron voor bepaalde darmbacteriën kunnen fungeren. Daarnaast bevat Zempira verschillende bacteriestammen, waaronder Bifidobacterium longum, Bifidobacterium lactis, Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lacticaseibacillus casei en Clostridium butyricum. N7-Neo Het uitgangspunt is eenvoudig: ondersteuning van een gezonde darmomgeving kan een waardevolle aanvulling zijn op een voedingspatroon dat gericht is op gewichtsbeheersing. Zempira en verzadiging GLP3 B Een belangrijk onderdeel van gewichtsbeheersing is het omgaan met hongergevoelens. Wanneer iemand langdurig honger heeft, kan het moeilijker worden om een uitgebalanceerd voedingspatroon vol te houden. Daarom is verzadiging een belangrijk aandachtspunt binnen een gezonde afslankstrategie. De formule van Zempira bevat prebiotische componenten zoals inuline. Prebiotische vezels worden door bepaalde darmbacteriën gebruikt als voedingsbron. Hierdoor passen ze binnen een bredere aanpak die gericht is op ondersteuning van het darmmicrobioom. GLP3-B Het is echter belangrijk om realistische verwachtingen te houden. Zempira is geen maaltijdvervanger en zorgt niet zelfstandig voor gewichtsverlies. Een eventueel effect moet worden gezien als onderdeel van een bredere leefstijl met evenwichtige voeding, voldoende beweging en een passende energie-inname. Ondersteuning van de spijsvertering en stoelgang GLP Control+ De gezondheid van het darmstelsel is een tweede belangrijk thema binnen de Zempira-formule. Vezels en prebiotische ingrediënten kunnen onderdeel zijn van een voedingspatroon dat de normale darmwerking ondersteunt. Inuline is een voedingsvezel die van nature voorkomt in onder andere cichorei. Het wordt niet volledig in de dunne darm verteerd en bereikt daardoor de dikke darm, waar het door bepaalde micro-organismen kan worden gebruikt. Sildorafil Voor mensen die hun dagelijkse vezelinname willen ondersteunen, kan een product met prebiotische ingrediënten interessant zijn. Tegelijkertijd is het verstandig om vezels geleidelijk op te bouwen en voldoende water te drinken. Een plotselinge verhoging van de hoeveelheid vezels kan bij sommige mensen juist tijdelijk leiden tot een opgeblazen gevoel of winderigheid. Zempira en het darmmicrobioom Sildorafil Spray Het darmmicrobioom bestaat uit een grote hoeveelheid micro-organismen die in het spijsverteringskanaal leven. De samenstelling ervan verschilt per persoon en kan worden beïnvloed door onder andere voeding en leefstijl. Zempira combineert prebiotische ingrediënten met verschillende bacteriestammen. Het doel van zo'n combinatie is om zowel voedingsstoffen voor bepaalde darmbacteriën als geselecteerde micro-organismen aan te bieden. Osanix Dat betekent niet dat een supplement het volledige darmmicrobioom kan vervangen of dat iedere gebruiker hetzelfde resultaat zal ervaren. De werking van bacteriestammen kan bovendien stam-specifiek zijn. Daarom is het verstandiger om Zempira te zien als een aanvulling op een gevarieerd voedingspatroon dan als een zelfstandige oplossing voor darmproblemen. Ondersteuning van de natuurlijke afweer MetaBrew De darmen en het immuunsysteem zijn nauw met elkaar verbonden. Een groot deel van het immuunsysteem bevindt zich in of rond het darmstelsel, waardoor darmgezondheid een relevant onderdeel is van algemene gezondheid. De bacteriestammen in Zempira zijn gekozen met het oog op ondersteuning van het darmmicrobioom. Toch moet onderscheid worden gemaakt tussen ondersteuning van een normale darmfunctie en medische claims over het behandelen of voorkomen van ziekten. Zempira is een voedingssupplement en geen geneesmiddel. De productinformatie adviseert bovendien om vóór gebruik een arts te raadplegen. Minder opgeblazen gevoel en hongergevoelens Testoblue Een opgeblazen gevoel kan verschillende oorzaken hebben, waaronder voeding, eetgewoonten, gasvorming en individuele gevoeligheden. Omdat Zempira ingrediënten bevat die invloed kunnen hebben op de darmomgeving, kan het voor sommige gebruikers passen binnen een leefstijl die gericht is op een comfortabelere spijsvertering. Ook hierbij geldt dat individuele reacties kunnen verschillen. Prebiotische vezels kunnen bij sommige mensen juist tijdelijk extra gasvorming veroorzaken wanneer het lichaam eraan moet wennen. Tirze+ Wie Zempira gebruikt, doet er daarom goed aan om aandacht te besteden aan voldoende vocht, een gevarieerd voedingspatroon en regelmatige lichaamsbeweging. Hoe gebruik je Zempira? Volgens de productinformatie wordt één capsule per dag aanbevolen. De capsule wordt ongeveer 15 tot 30 minuten vóór een maaltijd ingenomen met twee grote glazen water, waarbij minimaal 500 ml water wordt genoemd. Zempira Het is belangrijk om de aanbevolen dosering niet op eigen initiatief te verhogen. Wie medicijnen gebruikt, zwanger is, borstvoeding geeft of onder medische begeleiding staat, kan het beste eerst overleggen met een arts of andere gekwalificeerde zorgprofessional. Zempira als onderdeel van een gezonde leefstijl Een voedingssupplement kan een gezonde leefstijl ondersteunen, maar vervangt geen uitgebalanceerde voeding. Voor duurzaam gewichtsbeheer blijven dagelijkse gewoonten belangrijk: voldoende eiwitten en vezels, veel verschillende groenten en fruit, voldoende vocht, regelmatige beweging en voldoende slaap. Slim Coffee Booster Zempira kan binnen zo'n aanpak worden gezien als een aanvullende formule die zich richt op verzadiging, de darmomgeving en een normale spijsvertering. De productinformatie benadrukt eveneens dat individuele resultaten kunnen verschillen en dat het product niet bedoeld is om ziekten te diagnosticeren, behandelen, genezen of voorkomen. Conclusie Zempira onderscheidt zich door de combinatie van prebiotische ingrediënten en meerdere bacteriestammen. De formule is vooral interessant voor mensen die naast voeding en beweging extra aandacht willen besteden aan hun darmgezondheid en gewichtsbeheersing. Slim Coffee Booster De belangrijkste aandachtspunten zijn verzadiging, ondersteuning van de spijsvertering, het darmmicrobioom en een gezonde dagelijkse routine. Verwacht echter geen wondermiddel: gewichtsverlies is het resultaat van meerdere factoren en een supplement kan een gezonde leefstijl niet vervangen. Wie Zempira wil gebruiken, doet er verstandig aan eerst de actuele ingrediëntenlijst en gebruiksaanwijzing op de verpakking te controleren, omdat producten met dezelfde merknaam online verschillende samenstellingen kunnen hebben. Officiële website: https://zempira.nl/ https://slimcoffeebooster.nl/ https://n7neo.co.nl/ https://glp3b.nl/ https://glp3-b.nl/ https://glpcontrol.nl/ https://sildorafil.be/ https://sildorafilspray.net/ https://osanix.nl/ https://metabrew.be/ https://testoblue.be/ https://tirze.co.nl/

Good. Just give a name to the first percentage, it's salvageability, but maybe you can think of some other name. You could start with a 50% default for everything, to be fine-tuned later on if wanted (and food maybe could be ignored, because it's weird to salvage it). Incredibly complicated! And why? Why shouldn't walls and towers give a refund? Their stone was among the most salvageable resource. You said it yourself how things should be already, at least for buildings: And that's it! You later used the word "elegantly", then do it so: simple, no steps, no caps, no gaps, no radius, no more parameters, emulating existing processes, or their reverse. There you basically proposed to use unit(s) to unbuild structures, to be rewarded what I quoted from you at the beginning. Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't get why you would need ANY extra rule. What I quoted from you produces a simple rule: salvaging is unbuilding. For units, I can't help but keep saying that you don't need any extra rule! You use the same rule as with buildings: just unproduce them. Why complicate the ship rule with a radius, if you could just click a Salvage button on the ship, and then click a Dock, and all should be automatic from there? The ship would travel to the Dock, garrison, and get salvaged. All the radius thing is not simpler, not needed, not realistic, and not intuitive because the unproduce rule imitates that of buildings. Same with siege engines. Besides, you state you can dismantle (some of) them in one's territory, when one is not able to construct them there in the first place, incurring a logic gap. I agree doing so should be part of the game (with those big engines being extremely slow in return), but that's not yet there. When it is, yes, dismantle them wherever they can be constructed, to keep following the simple unbuilding/unproduce rule, but in the meantime it would be incoherent: the disassembly being realistic, while the assembly isn't. No. Scorched earth tactics should not be ultra-fast, that's exactly the point not to get the unsightly simultaneous collapse of everything (by the AI at least). What should be ultra-fast is deleting some building or unit that is bothering the player (I'm exaggerating with "ultra", it could take a very few seconds). The whole point is: you can use Self-Destruct, but you can't abuse it. The key is what I said: "only gets noticeable the more buildings at a time one wants to destroy". Thus, the best way to deal with all these and other issues at the same time seems to be modifying Self-Destruct the way I explained before (queue buildings, queue units in parallel if considered, and sequentially in each of both queues drain their HP at like 1000/s, etc), and all this has nothing to do with Salvage, there's no resource reward, because it's simpler and faster to execute.

Also if you could add tool tips. When on dark theme, it is had to tell which buttons you can click and not click (see photos). Could you have some other colors, pwease. Also, do you use github or gitlab or any of those type things? It might be easier for other people to update or something

I loaded some maps, and it worked. Can you make it so you can load mods for it, like if you are making a map for a mod that adds new structures. Because it was saying a certain civ name was undefined, but it was, just in a mod. Maybe you already added the setting, but I didn't see it

All right here is my proposal: a refund is limited to a percentage of the resources it took to construct something, say, 50%, multiplied with the current health status of the object, i.e. a ship at 60%health gets 30% refund. all refunds are tied to a condition: ships must be within the perimeter (30m) of your own dock. Outside that area there is no refund. siege engines must be on your own territory, no refund outside. buildings are more complicated: some should not give a refund (walls, towers), others only give a refund if not under attack since 15s and fully owned, and if one own unit is present in their vicinity (radius 20m). Deletion wiht refund becomes a salvaging teardown: the building loses health over, 10 seconds, the resources arrive at the end, any enemy damage during that period cancels it. Deletion of buildings without anyone nearby, or not satisfying the other conditions is immediate and without a refund. All of this remains configurable as I am not yet sure about the best settings (distances, level of refund, criteria, teardown period) I'll adapt the mod and test it first before posting. Done testing. Please see below for the mod. WIll also put it onto mod.io and hope it can be signed @Stan`@ltms recover-resources.zip README.md

OK, point taken - how could that be addressed? Should we introduce steps and/or a cap, like 0% finalized- 100% refund, up to 70% finalized - 30% refund, more than 70% finalized - no refund anymore. Deletion after completion - 30% refund. Would that work for you? Currently no salvaging of destroyed buildings exists and they can be immediately deleted anyway at the moment. Requiring units (no siege engines) to actively destroy own buildings woud prevent doing that to a whole group of buildings at once already. Would you really want to use valuable units to destroy that one storehouse that's not needed anymore jsut to get back, say, 30 wood? For me this could be an emergency aspect to get more resources if none is in reach and no bartering is possible anymore, e.g. after a devastating attack of your enemy. Of course, but for gameplay and simplicity I would possibly tend towards the same level of resource refund (we could use the same mechanism). But isn't that a contradiction? If it shall be ultra-fast (scorched earth tactics) it cannot be queued as this would take too long.

Did a total review and refactoring of the user interface and functionality. Hope it is better now. I am placing the python code and new screenshots in the original post on top of this conversation. @Asher I'd love to have your comemnts - please have a look!

Also, if anyone interested know how to animate, we are looking for charge animation (strike while moving) and staggering animation.

No worries.

Hi everyone, I've been looking into the possibility of creating Proto-Germanic voice lines for the Germans in 0 A.D. First, a note about AI: I used ChatGPT to help me find linguistic sources and prepare the first word suggestions below. This is preliminary research, not a finished translation. I'm not a historical linguist, and the proposed forms have not been independently reviewed by one. Some of them may well be wrong. No audio has been generated yet. My idea is not to reconstruct exactly what the Cimbri spoke around 100 BC. As far as I understand, the surviving evidence simply doesn't allow this. Instead, I would like to find a reasonable linguistic approximation that fits the historical setting of 0 A.D. and sounds good in the game. We only need about 18 short voice lines. Ideally, they should be one or two syllables long, but I don't think this needs to be a strict requirement. Before experimenting with recordings or text-to-speech, I would like to get the words and their pronunciation into a reasonably good state. 1. Which language should we use? Release 28 describes the Germans as a coalition of the Cimbri, Teutones, Ambrones and other Celto-Germanic groups. Official Release 28 announcement: https://play0ad.com/new-release-0-a-d-release-28-boiorix/ The linguistic situation seems rather uncertain. For example, Gilles Quentel discusses early contacts between Continental Celtic and Germanic. There are also different interpretations of the surviving names of the Cimbri and Teutones. Bichlmeier and Blažek discuss several possible etymologies of these tribal names in their 2020 publication. I think reconstructed Proto-Germanic could be a reasonable common language for the faction, as long as we make clear that this is an approximation, not a reconstruction of an attested Cimbrian dialect. There is also the question of the First Germanic Sound Shift and its chronology. For our purposes, I would initially use a consistent reconstructed Proto-Germanic pronunciation rather than trying to reconstruct a hypothetical earlier dialect specifically for 100 BC. Of course, I would be interested in other opinions on this. 2. First suggestions for the voice lines I used the English meanings from the Audio Voice List, with the Latin translations as an example: https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/wiki/Audio_Voice_List The following is a working draft, NOT a finished or academically validated translation. The asterisk indicates a reconstructed form. Most candidates were initially found through Wiktionary's Proto-Germanic reconstruction entries, which often refer to etymological dictionaries such as Kroonen or Orel. However, I have not independently checked every individual reconstruction against these books. I also used the freely available Proto-Germanic grammar by Winfred P. Lehmann and the IE-CoR linguistic database. Some forms are more tentative than others. I have marked the particularly uncertain ones instead of pretending that we already have a complete solution. Selection and greetings Hello Proposed: *hailaz! Literally "healthy, whole". A possible greeting, but not an attested Cimbrian one. What is it? Proposed: *hwat? Simply "what?". Shortened for gameplay. My lord? Proposed: *frawjô? "Lord", without "my". The appropriate form of address should be checked. Movement and fighting I will walk Proposed: *gō "I go / walk". I will fight Proposed: *fehtō "I fight". The meaning and exact form should be checked. I will attack! Candidate: *hwētō! "I attack". This candidate needs further linguistic checking. I will march! Proposed: *farō! "I go / travel". Not specifically military marching, but perhaps sufficient for a short acknowledgement. I will retreat! Candidate: *wīkwaną "To yield / retreat". This is still an infinitive. A shorter and grammatically appropriate spoken form is needed. Battle cry Open. Perhaps a non-verbal shout would work. Alternatively, a short expression based on a reconstructed verb for fighting could be considered. I would not want to invent something and present it as an authentic Germanic battle cry. Working and gathering I will build Proposed: *timrō "I build". I will work land Candidate: *arjaną "To plough". The appropriate short spoken form still needs checking. I will gather Proposed: *samnō "I gather / collect". I will herd Proposed: *drībō "I drive". This could refer to driving livestock, but is not exactly the same as tending a herd. I will fish Proposed: *fiskō "I fish". I will repair Candidate: *bōtī "Improve / make good!" Not specifically repairing a building. The form and its use in this context need checking. I will hunt Reconstructed stem: *huntōn- The precise form and vowel length remain open. The IE-CoR database gives *huntōn- as its reference form, but its explanation also mentions *hūnton-. This needs further checking before choosing a spoken form. I will heal Candidate: *hailī "Heal!" An imperative rather than "I will heal". The exact form needs checking. Other (I will put myself into) garrison Candidate: *felhō Intended meaning: "I enter / go inside". This is one of the least secure suggestions and needs both lexical and grammatical checking. It is not an attested term for entering a garrison. A few remarks about the list The grammatical forms are not consistent yet. Some are first-person forms, others imperatives, infinitives or reconstructed stems. Personally, I don't think every response necessarily needs to be in the same grammatical form. The important thing is that it works as a short and natural-sounding acknowledgement in the game. However, we should make sure that the individual forms are actually plausible and not simply invented by an AI. Also, several suggestions deliberately use a broader meaning than the English original. For example, "I travel" instead of "I march" or "I drive" instead of "I herd". These would be gameplay decisions, not exact translations. I would be happy to replace any of these suggestions if there are better alternatives. 3. Sources Here are the main sources I found. Historical background Gilles Quentel (2012) Early Linguistic Contacts between Continental Celtic and Germanic: Lexical Aspects. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331482184_Early_Linguistic_Contacts_between_Continental_Celtic_and_Germanic Harald Bichlmeier and Václav Blažek (2020) "Cimbri" et "Teutoni". https://journals.lki.lt/actalinguisticalithuanica/article/view/2041 Václav Blažek On chronology of the First Germanic Sound Shift (Lex Rask – Grimm). https://doi.org/10.14746/linpo.2022.64.1.1 These publications discuss historical names, etymologies and linguistic developments. They do not provide translations of the 18 voice lines. Grammar and pronunciation Winfred P. Lehmann A Grammar of Proto-Germanic. University of Texas at Austin. https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/books/pgmc/index The chapters on phonology and inflection are particularly relevant. R. D. Fulk (2018) A Comparative Grammar of the Early Germanic Languages. https://www.benjamins.com/catalog/sigl.3 The complete e-book is available as Open Access. I have not worked through the whole book, though. Vocabulary IE-CoR – Indo-European Cognate Relationships https://iecor.clld.org/ One useful example is the entry for "hunt": https://iecor.clld.org/cognatesets/1349 It references Kroonen's Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Germanic and also illustrates why some details need further checking. I also used Wiktionary's Proto-Germanic reconstruction entries as starting points for individual words: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Proto-Germanic_reconstructed_terms Some examples: *fehtaną – to fight: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/fehtaną *timrōną – to build: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/timrōną *fiskōną – to fish: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/fiskōną *hwētaną – to attack: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/hwētaną These entries are helpful for finding possible forms and references, but they are not a substitute for checking the original academic literature. 4. What is still missing? Before recording anything, I think we would need: - Someone with knowledge of historical Germanic linguistics to review the suggested words and their grammatical forms. - A consistent pronunciation guide, preferably using IPA. - Better solutions for the uncertain expressions, especially retreat, repair, healing and garrison. - A decision on the battle cry. - A way to produce natural-sounding recordings that can be freely distributed with 0 A.D. I know there has already been some discussion about AI-generated content in the project. I'm not attached to using AI for the final audio. Human recordings would be fine as well. For now, AI has mainly helped me find sources and put together this preliminary list. I would be interested to know whether AI-assisted linguistic research is acceptable for this kind of contribution, and what the requirements for the final recordings would be. 5. Questions Does this general approach make sense for the Germans in 0 A.D.? Would reconstructed Proto-Germanic be a suitable choice, or should we consider another linguistic approach? And is anyone here familiar with historical Germanic linguistics who could help check the proposed words and pronunciation? I would be happy to continue working on this if there is interest. Thanks!

Oh sorry, I was pretty sure I disabled all mods, but one was still there. I disabled it and didn't get the error. Sorry

Exciting news! I've finely brought this project to a testable and reviewable state. A big change since my last posts is that I've managed to make the performance impact minimal. The inertia system pay for itself and is kinda having 0 cost including the collision detection logic and other logic related to it. Having a lot of units that have the "charge" effect fighting is also demonstrated to be reasonable on performance with only a few percent increase in simulation cost for a given battle. This project have a lot of implications, and anyone willing to be testing the PR and giving feedback would help tremendously to make it move forward. If you are able to, please do. PR link

Sounds like the gui/session/session.xml file is out-of-date. Are sure you have nothing modified and no mods loaded?

Good to know! And a big thanks to @Vantha

@Vantha

Just opened 0ad, and got this. I got it even without mods. 0ad would start -> I would go to matches -> new game -> then start, and it would start, and then it would quit

True. But not everyone can contribute the same way. Making tools more accessible could bring in more creators.

I get it. But I still think there's untapped potential for solo content. And I have huge respect for what the devs have built. That's why I'm here.

With a Pull Request you ask that your code be merged into the source code.

Not really, right now in the game, when you abort ship or engine training, you get the whole refund. This might be unrealistic, but maybe it would be too punishing and different from other RTS to do otherwise. I didn't think of the second point, and although it makes sense, you can't get a refund from engines that cannot be garrisoned, and you are using a different rule than with ships. That's why I thought for them to go back to the Arsenal. Sure, but that's what salvaging would be. Right now the game only destroys. That's why you return the ship to the Dock to get resources back, it's not the same as scuttling. It's not so much about an actual exploit, but a gap in the logical working of things. If at 70% built I realise I want to destroy the building without benefiting from it, waiting for completion would give back more resources, making this refund scheme unnecessarily irrational, while ignoring calls for it "not to be too simple and rewarding". This is exactly my latest Salvage proposal: "do what you want to do, but require unit(s) to do it ("salvager(s)")". If you just garrison it you don't even need animations, which could be just construction in reverse. If the refund will be the corresponding loot or a "fraction of the materials used" (maybe the first is calculated as the second?) it's just a choice that can be discussed (it's all the same for me, as long as the rule is simple, but in reality salvaging is of course more rewarding than loot). But, on top of that, I didn't want to remove the Self-Destruct option because some people will surely want to delete things ultra fast without any salvaging. That's why I now proposed for it to work like always, but in a queue (you imagine the arsonists, they were supposed to do things ultra fast and as an excuse to solve the collapse issue anyway). Other things to consider regarding the destruction queue: when queued at the same time, elements should be ordered from lower to higher HP. Whatever addition to the queue comes at the end of it. If 50% of the ownership is lost (I think this is the limit to destroy them in the first place right now), elements have to be unqueued (limiting a player's ability to destroy a lot of buildings just before losing ownership, which is what the AI always unsightly does). While units, if considered, should have their own queue (running in parallel), a single queue icon (skull) should appear on the right, showing the remaining time of the whole process (that is, the longest time considering both building and unit destruction queues), which can be aborted by right-clicking on it (already destroyed/dead elements remain so of course, while whatever was being processed at that very moment ends damaged/injured). Unqueuing individual elements should also be possible, maybe by pressing some icon indicating that they are in the destruction queue. The HP drain could be around 1000 or 500/s.

Hello my friend, how are you? Sorry for my ignorance, but what exactly is a PR?

Sorry, did not see your message before responding to your previous one. The discussion is less about the refund as such but more abpout shouldbalow the user to simply deletey a building (as well as a unit). For buildings, this goes back to the proposal to extend the destruction process a bit. In fact, what if we need at least one unit commanded to "work" on the building to destroy it, providing a similar benefit as when you destroy your enemy's buildings? This could be exactly the same process as attacking an enemy building (only with a differnt animation possibly). Instead of having a building-cenbtered command "delete" we would need a command to units "destroy my builidng", similar to "build that builidng". This could elegantly take care of my previous question "what if an enemy attacks your building while you were destructing it yourself". The mechanism to arbitrate resources in case of concurrent destruction by two parties attacking the same building is part of the game already (I think/I hope, at least this exists for conquering, never checked for destruction of an enemy builidng together with an ally).

This is one of the many compromises to gameplay we have to make, I guess. Hmm. You are right. So no refund after destruction at all because the same principle applies to buildings, ships, siege engines? To provide a refund, - ships need to go back to the dock (done) - siege engines need to be manned (at least one unit) prior to destruction I believe we agree already on these two. There is no refund for buildings when they are at 100% (finished), ever. From the real world, I believe that old buildings (ruins) were often used as a quarry/resource for erecting new ones, hence I question the rule 100% built- 0% refund. The rule in game (0% built/100% back up to 100% built/0% back) certainly applies to the resources you had originally put aside to construct that building. After it has been built (100%) you spent 100% of resources, so destroying currently means losing all of it. Could refunding be exploited? Not really: You get a higher fraction back if deleting after finalizing it, but you had to invest the 100% before. The only cheat here is, that you benefited form the building's function (e.g. research a new technology) while it was working and still get a refund after its destruction.

Since now I see your mod applies to "finished" buildings, I guess you are not considering that. Independently of Salvage working with "salvager(s)" to avoid the issues mentioned, got a better idea to deal with Self-Destruct: make a destruction queue, each structure getting sequentially destroyed by quickly draining their HP (giving a little time to each element for the queue to work). This solves the unsightly collapse issue, only gets noticeable the more buildings at a time one wants to destroy, doesn't involve other units ("arsonists"), adds absolutely no micro, and opens the possibility of eventually aborting the process before it starts or while it's under way (in that last case, one ending with a damaged structure because of the HP drain). Doing the same for units is a possibility, for them to die in fast succession instead of all at the exact same time, which, like the collapse issue, is quite goofy.

But automatically deleting the building for usable resources is exactly that, plus being automatic, plus getting resources back, plus the animation makes less sense. The only purpose of the "arsonist" (which was never intended to be a new unit, but a role present units take) is to avoid the simultaneous collapse of everything. Besides, you are defeating the purpose of how the game works. As mentioned: when you delete a building, "the amount of resources you get back depends on how much has been actually built. That is, if 35% of the structure has been built, one gets 65% of resources back, and so on". This implies "100% built means 0% of resources back". The present behaviour "makes perfect sense if one thinks of it as the resources having been set apart beforehand for construction, the resources already used being lost". If you want to press just delete and get resources back, you'd need to change how the whole thing already works, otherwise it makes no sense (if you get back, say, 30% with your method, if a structure is already 70% built and you want to destroy it, it'd be more rewarding to wait until it's completely built and then destroy it ). EDIT: Unless you are already considering all this, and what you get back is the unbuilt fraction and a fraction of the fraction already built, which would be the general rule (at present the fraction of the fraction already built is 0%, and you want to give it a value). There's another possibility in between all of this: do what you want to do, but require unit(s) to do it ("salvager(s)"), the action is just Salvage, could be quite fast (unrealistic since it should be like unbuilding it, but whatever), and not only avoids the collapse issue, but ends not being in contradiction with present implementations or "too simple and rewarding". One assumes they got out just before destruction I guess, but sieges are completely weird in the game anyway (which I think needs fixing).