All Activity

see also

Buenos días ,tardes o noches: -Aquí les dejo un avance de los bocetos de todos los mapas Asiáticos de Tipo Escenario: (¿Pueden adivinar a que parte del mundo son ?) Desculpen las molestias*

I don’t know much about this stuff, but I feel like the technical challenges of a big player increase might be underestimated, especially given the current resources behind 0 A.D. It’s not just about getting more visibility, scaling and maintaining the infrastructure is a whole different challenge.

I’d love to see it happen, mostly for easier updates and more players finding the game. The server part would need planning, but the idea feels possible if the team wants it.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone's and @real_tabasco_sauce's call I'd say, since they worked a lot on the civ and know the vision behind it. I personally, though, wouldn't mind if they aren't from Cimbrian Wars, as long as the characters are still Germanic, from about 0ad's time frame and ideally also historically relevant or interesting.

Try refresh multiple times.

Login also appears to be broken? Or at least not working properly for me.

Hi, when I try to access the gitea instance for 0AD, the styles appear to be broken (see attached screenshot). Is this a recent breakage and any plans to fix it?

I'd like to return to this point because I've noticed my message wasn't understood. When I say that Euler represents a school of thought from the mid-20th century, I don't mean that he originated from that era, but rather that he is associated with that methodology. Wolfram Euler is a German linguist specializing in Indo-European languages, whose work is rooted in the tradition of classical philology. An independent but prolific researcher, he distinguishes himself through an approach based on traditional comparative analysis, the study of hydronyms, and internal reconstruction, rather than the multidisciplinary methods that dominate the field today (such as phylogenetic modeling, computational linguistics, or historical sociolinguistics). This methodological orientation, rigorous yet conservative, gives his publications strong internal consistency while placing him on the fringes of mainstream theoretical trends. His best-known contributions concern the history of Germanic and Balto-Slavic languages, where he defends several minority positions: a prolonged cohesion of West Germanic, a location of the Germanic Urheimat in Central Germany rather than Scandinavia, an internalist interpretation of Germanic innovations, and a critique of the existence of a unitary Proto-Balto-Slavic language. He also adopts a late chronology for the formation of Proto-Slavic, following the thesis of Georg Holzer. While these propositions are rigorously argued, they stand in clear opposition to the prevailing consensus and are regarded as heterodox contributions rather than authoritative reference models. For these reasons, Euler cannot be presented as a representative of the general scientific community's viewpoint. His work is respected for its erudition and precision, but it does not form the basis of the reconstructions accepted by the majority of Indo-Europeanists. His adherence to an ethno-historical lens, which explains linguistic shifts primarily through population movements and ethnic continuities, stands in sharp contrast to the modern archaeological and linguistic 'caution' (notably due to the rejection of the Siedlungsarchäologie). Coupled with his ties to conservative intellectual circles (like the Bibliothek des Konservatismus in Berlin), this methodological stance consigns his work to the margins of mainstream academia, even as the erudition of his research remains recognized. Personally, I don't think this is a figure to be put forward as an absolute reference in a debate.

don't buff persians plus persians can cumulate theses 2 solutions btw corals

I know, I saw the repo. This is a good idea but again I want to advise you that you should really avoid carving up certain civs just to force them into one side of the fence. For example, with the Germanic peoples, I find it clumsy to restrict oneself to representing either the period before our era or the period after our era. You will have this problem with other civs like the Dacians and the Parthians. It's best to put these kinds of civs in Empires Besieged rather than Empires Ascendant. Since Empires Besieged is a kind of expansion, it is less of a problem to have a civ that includes some of its elements that date back to the period before our era. I understand that you did not want Empires Ascendant to extend into the period of our era. It seems that this is the key point of contention. So it's better to accept some overlap in the other direction. If the mod includes civs with characters and references that span both periods, it's much less of a problem than if it were the base game.

@wowgetoffyourcellphone and I actually started the mod on Gitea but we haven't committed anything yet.

It's good to return to a more reasonable position. I would remind you that in 2021, there were proposals to replace Boudicca in order to respect this cutoff. Especially if the team members decide to make Empires Besieged an official mod that simply adds content (notably new playable civilizations), it has to be flexible. Historical cultures that fall on both sides of this arbitrary boundary will pose a problem otherwise.

320 per 1 food? if you add the house tech into it,it probably become somewhere around 180 (guesstimate, not calculating) that's not bad for a obscure piece of the biggest civ in game right? the persians need a lot of balance changes (both buffs and nerfs) perhaps I'll make a thread on its own

I suppose the - 500 B.C. and 0 A.D cutoff, but I suppose +- 20 years isn't that bad

In any case, it's you and @real_tabasco_sauce who decide. Noted.

Interesting but it’s an incomplete picture. 1. Corrals use food as a resource input, which is slower to gather. 2. Corrals use of food to gather food also means that the food collection chart will have lots scarcity dips caused by capital investment costs. This is pretty dangerous and can bankrupt a player quickly. 3. Corrals require more micro. 4. Corrals require continual investment/management whereas ice houses just need to be built once. 5. Ice houses are unique to Persia, which has a higher pop cap/ eco potential, so more it’s easier to collect the input resources 6. You’re missing the corral training tech 7. Cows can be batch trained 8. You can build 7 (or more corrals) all at once all in all, I agree ice houses need a buff but I don’t think it’s as desperate as the above portrays

I don't know, probably a bad dream. Thanks for the clarification. Should we use names that do not originate from the migration of the Cimbri?

Hero names were specifically removed from the AI names a while ago (https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/commit/22cbd39bbd46d1bf2e87b8c26ae58f28a6d6fa1e), so that's not an option, unfortunately.

In the near-term, we can certainly add Claodicus and Caesorix, I ran into those two on my relatively brief research into the topic. I am not opposed to expanding the timeline for the Germans to include teutoberg and arminius, so I am not sure why you say

Debate is scientifically very valuable and it seems that you both know a lot about the topic (certainly more than me). But please keep a professional tone and don't get personal. There's nothing wrong with someone simply because they disagree, especially since the language is resconstructed anyway, so there is no right and wrong, just more plausible and less plausible. I think you both made fair points, and with the knowledge I have I honestly am unable to decide which is the better option. Seems right, thanks, I can add it to the PR.

@real_tabasco_sauce@Vantha Which option do you prefer? @Obelix suggested making variations on the few known names. I posted a series of character names related to Germanic peoples dating back to the period before our era. Which ones are you interested in? Should we reconstruct them in Proto-Germanic?

Yes, unfortunately, that's somewhat of a problem with conceptualizing the Germanic peoples based on a very short period in their history, namely the migrations of the Cimbri, Teutones, Ambrones, and Tigurini. Not only are these historical events not very well documented, but it's also unclear what is Celtic and what is Germanic in the accounts. To my knowledge, only the names Boiorix, Lugius, Teutobod, Claodicus, and Caesorix are known. There is also Divico for the Tigurini mentioned by Caesar as having fought against Lucius Cassius in 107 BC (Agen). If we look elsewhere among the other Germanic peoples, there are Cotto, Clondicus, Deldo and Teutagonus, chiefs of the Bastarnae or of the Peucini. They are all mentioned by Livy except Teutagonus who is mentioned by Valerius Flaccus. There is also a chief of the Sciri mentioned on a stelae decree of Histria/Istros, his name is 'Atès' or 'Atas'. Finally there is Ariovistus of the Suebi mentioned by Caesar. There are also two brothers, Nasua and Cimberius, leading a coalition of the Suebi from Germany to reinforce Ariovistus' forces. There are, of course, many well-known characters such as Arminius and Maroboduos, but there is no chance of ever seeing them appear in the base game. Now, the problem with the names I mentioned above is that we need to reconstruct them into Proto-Germanic for the Germanic characters and translate them into Gaulish for the Celtic characters.

We need five more AI names added to Claodicus, Divico and Caesorix. As we already had some intense debate on Specific Phase names for the Germans I thought we might get some input from the community as well (i.e. @Genava55 and @Thalatta). Background @Vantha already reported Issue #8404 back in October: Suggestion Of course we could reuse the Hero names Boiorix, Teutobod und Lugius, but making it more diverse sounds good to me. What do you think?

@user1 My lobby name: roothopper Offender: Wilsonao They left as I was attacking their base. They refused to return despite being warned. commands.txt