Jump to content


Community Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Nescio

  1. Thank you for your kind words and good luck! I'm not exactly sure what you intended to write there, but “salvage” is more polite than “scavenge” or “savage”.
  2. In the templates you find two different times: <PrepareTime>: the point after the start of the attack when the damage is actually inflicted. <RepeatTime>: the duration of the attack (i.e. the time in between attacks). The animation time is stretched to match the <RepeatTime>. I don't know how the sounds work. @Alexandermb, @Stan`, is there an easy way to look up the real duration of attack animations? In some cases we might say gameplay trumps realism, but for e.g. animals I think it would be better to adjust the repeat time to the animation time, instead of vice versa.
  3. Thanks. “Quintus Curtius Rufus 8.9.29” would have been enough, but providing a link to text and translation is indeed helpful. Now I wonder what Arrian writes on Porus and elephants. [EDIT] Diodorus Siculus on Porus and the Battle of the Hydaspes (17.87–89): Text and translation taken from Perseus. (No elephant armour, turrets, or howdahs are mentioned.) The corresponding, but much longer, account in Quintus Curtius Rufus is 8.14 (which starts on page 344 = 354/654 of the book you linked).
  4. Source, please? Do the Vedas explicitly mention elephants being used on the battlefield, or just elephants (e.g. as animals living in the forests, mounts for the gods, beasts of burden, or assisting people with heavy work)? Elephant warfare undoubtedly originated on Sri Lanka or in India long before Darius III and Alexander III, however, elephant armour, turrets, and howdahs did not exist since the beginning of time. Please provide a clear reference.
  5. A bit of context: 283 BC: Demetrius Poliorkētēs dies in captivity. 282 BC: Ptolemy I Sōtēr dies, is succeeded by Ptolemy II Philadelphos. 281 BC: Battle of Corupedium, Lysimachus and Seleucus I Nicatōr are killed, Ptolemy Keraunos seizes the throne of Thrace and Macedon. 280 BC: Pyrrhus of Epirus invades Italy. Whilst the Ptolemaic elephant hunting programme was started by Ptolemy II, at that point he had just succeeded his father and his expeditions would not have commenced yet; the only elephants the Ptolemies had then were what was left of Alexander's Indian elephant corps, which was quite old by then (hence the need to find a source to replace them). You mean: Unfortunately that sentence is not referenced. I reread Plutarch Pyrrhus, who informs us Pyrrhus took 20 elephants with him into Italy (15.1), but does not state where, when, or whom Pyrrhus got them from. According to Justin 17.2 (Latin, French, English), Pyrrhus received an army from Ptolemy Keraunos, which included 50 elephants. If Justin is correct, then the elephants Pyrrhus had came from the Indian elephants Seleucus obtained from Chandragupta. This is more plausible than the alternative (Alexander's aging elephants shipped from Egypt). It's not impossible they had turrets. It's unclear when elephant turrets were exactly introduced, but it must have been at some point between 323 (death of Alexander) and 217 (Battle of Raphia).
  6. This looks great, many thanks for compiling such a lengthy report! I couldn't help but notice you use different varieties of English in your text, e.g. Please choose one (Oxford, British, American) and stick with it consistently. Furthermore, ensure all sentences end with a full stop, check and double check all user names (e.g. I believe ValihrAnt is supposed to have a capital A), and verify all links work and show up properly. Good impressions matter in outreach. [EDIT] On transifex eight languages are above 99%, three more above 95%, and six more above 90%, which makes a total of 17, not 16. Wouldn't “September 2019 – May 2020” be better?
  7. https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2779
  8. Thanks, that explains it. I suppose I simply have to get used to no longer typing "preview". Also, "only" saves three characters.
  9. Today I updated arc; apparently the libphutil is deprecated and merged into the arcanist repository. To my surprise, however, `arc diff --preview` no longer works; I get: [0ad]$ arc diff --preview Usage Exception: Unknown argument 'preview'. Try 'arc help'. I don't understand why. After a quick search I found an alternative, `arc diff --only`. What's the difference?
  10. Quoting a paragraph from Joyce Poole, Paula Kahumbu, Ian Whyte “Loxodonta africana Savanna Elephant (African Bush Elephant)” in Jonathan Kingdon, David C. D. Happold, Thomas M. Butynski, Michael Hoffmann, Meredith Happold, Jan Kalina (eds.) Mammals of Africa (London 2013) 181–194; 183: And the corresponding paragraph from Andrea Turkalo, Richard Barnes “Loxodonta cyclotis Forest Elephant” in Jonathan Kingdon, David C. D. Happold, Thomas M. Butynski, Michael Hoffmann, Meredith Happold, Jan Kalina (eds.) Mammals of Africa (London 2013) 195–200; 196:
  11. True. My point is size alone is not a good criterion. The pygmy elephants of the Congo were long thought to be a separate species, but they turn out to be simply an isolated population of forest elephants; the same is true of pygmy peoples. No, actually not. During colonial times about a dozen subspecies were proposed for the African elephant, but none are recognized nowadays, nor is the L. a. pharaonensis. Practically all scholarly publications on hellenistic war elephants from, say, the last 50 years, typically state, or repeat, as a matter of fact, that North African elephants were forest elephants (Loxodonta cyclotis). Furthermore, they rarely highlight the fact that Carthage and the Ptolemies sourced them from two entirely separate populations. Historians and classicists are not biologists. Only the latest cyclus matters, what happened long before is not very relevant in this case (the spread of African elephants). Whether they are aware of it or not, those arguing that North African elephants were forest elephants implicitly assume an argument along the lines of: c. 15 000 years ago both bush and forest elephants roamed the entire continent. Due to increasing desertification, elephants disappeared from the Sahara. Bush elephants died out in Mediterranean North Africa and the broader Red Sea region, whereas forest elephants survived there, as in the equatorial rainforests. (Somehow the different climates and environments didn't matter.) Everywhere else bush elephants survived and forest elephants disappeared. (Somehow the different climates and environments did matter.) Despite the distance and isolation, the forest elephants of Mediterranean North Africa and those of the broader Red Sea region were rather similar to each other. Starting from about 2000 years ago, elephants died out in Mediterranean North Africa and the broader Red Sea region. Subsequently, bush elephants moved into the broader Red Sea region, from which the modern elephant populations there are derived. Compare this with: c. 15 000 years ago bush elephants roamed the entire continent. Forest elephants were limited to the equatorial rainforests, as they are now. Due to increasing desertification, elephants disappeared from the Sahara, isolating the bush elephants in Mediterranean North Africa from those elsewhere. Often simpler explanations tend to be more likely.
  12. https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/28114-removing-territorial-system/&tab=comments#comment-396101
  13. Yes! 0 A.D.'s elephants are a bit ugly; e.g. their necks are too long: Also, if the feet are to be improved, Asian elephants have “usually five nail-like structures on each forefoot and four on each rear foot instead of [African elephants, which have] four and three” https://doi.org/10.2307/3504045 0 A.D. has separate lion and lioness actors, and also bulls and cows for cattle. Would it also be possible to have male and female elephants? For instance, male Indian elephants, 1.7× as tall as humans, can be used for war elephants, and female Indian elephants, 1.4× as tall as humans, and without tusks, could be used for worker elephants. It would also be nice to have elephant calves of a few sizes (e.g. 25%, 50%, 75%).
  14. If and when units on walls no longer interfere with the opening and closing of gates (D1418), it would be possible to garrison units on gates (D2760) and also on wall towers (D2769), differentiating them further from free-standing defence towers and making them more similar to other wall segments. Most wall towers are already suitable for this, with a platform on top, but a few actors would need to be adjusted. From left to right, the kush, mace, and sele wall towers: The Kushite actor is fine and doesn't need changes. The one of the “Hellenes” (used by athen, mace, spart) needs its roof replaced with a platform, like those of other civs; it also has a tiny window halfway and is the only one with a door at ground level; could those be removed? Walls were typically solid up to the parapet level. The sele also needs a platform instead of the roof, or, if you want more variation, raise the roof and replace the chamber with a platform (cf. gaul); also remove those arrowslits in the middle. The brit wall tower does have a platform on top, but the roof is so low there is no room for placing units. At the very least its roof should be raised considerably (cf. gaul). However, the brit wall tower could actually use a redesign, since currently it's neither round, nor square, nor a regular octagon. The last civ with unsuitable wall towers is maur; here the situation is more complicated, because the short, medium, long segments have roofs too, which would should not end in empty space, and because the wall tower design is basically used in the gate as well:
  15. Here are more pictures from Wikimedia Commons, to highlight the differences between elephant subspecies. First the African bush or savanna elephant (Loxodonta africana); note the pronounced curve of the back, the large, triangular ears, and the curved, forward-pointing tusks: Then there is the African forest elephant (Loxodonta cyclotis); notice the more level back, the rounder ears, and the straight, downward-pointing tusks: Next the Indian elephant (Elephas maximus indicus); you can see it has a round back, a more dome-like skull, much smaller ears, and a trunk with only one “finger”; also, females don't have tusks: The Sri Lanka elephant (Elephas maximus maximus) is largely similar, but darker of skin: Finally, the Sumatran elephant (Elephas maximus sumatranus):
  16. For your information, D2503 has been committed as rP23703 and rP23704 (thank you, @Stan`), which means selection shapes are now named differently, so you'll probably have to update your mod, @wowgetoffyourcellphone. Other mods should be fine. I see only now I forgot to add the selection texture line thickness required for constant line thickness (units with smaller footprints need thicker lines), so here's the table again, @fatherbushido, with an additional column: 128x256 : width × depth ; proportional ; required for constant line thickness chicken : 0.9 × 1.8 ; 3 ; 33.333 fox, *piglet*, *rabbit* : 1 × 2 ; 3.333 ; 30 *peacock* : 1.1 × 2.2 ; 3.667 ; 27.273 goat : 1.3 × 2.6 ; 4.333 ; 23.077 dog, sheep, wolf : 1.4 × 2.8 ; 4.667 ; 21.429 gazelle : 1.5 × 3.0 ; 5 ; 20 deer, elephant infants : 1.7 × 3.4 ; 5.667 ; 17.647 cattle, giraffe infant, zebra : 1.9 × 3.8 ; 6.333 ; 15.789 bear, *boar*, lion : 2 × 4 ; 6.667 ; 15 donkey, horse, muskox, tiger, wildebeest : 2.1 × 4.2 ; 7 ; 14.286 dromedary camel : 2.5 × 5 ; 8.333 ; 12 white rhinoceros : 2.8 × 5.6 ; 9.333 ; 10.714 *hippopotamus* : 3 × 6 ; 10 ; 10 walrus : 3.2 × 6.4 ; 10.667 ; 9.375 giraffe : 3.3 × 6.6 ; 11 ; 9.091 African forest elephant : 3.5 × 7 ; 11.667 ; 8.571 Asian elephant : 4 × 8 ; 13.333 ; 7.5 African bush elephant : 4.6 × 9.2 ; 15.333 ; 6.522 128x512 : width × depth ; proportional ; required for constant line thickness great white shark : 2 × 8 ; 6.667 ; 15 *Nile crocodile* : 3 × 12 ; 10 ; 10 humpback whale : 4 × 16 ; 13.333 ; 7.5 fin whale : 5 × 20 ; 16.667 ; 6
  17. https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2684
  18. It depends on your operating system, see https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/GameDataPaths On my end (Fedora 32) it's under .config/0ad/logs/
  19. Yes, this is something I have too, for years now, both when I open up atlas from inside the game and when I run it from the command line with: binaries/system/pyrogenesis -editor It probably has something to do with the fact I have a high resolution (3840×2160) and Atlas treats system settings differently than 0 A.D. @vladislavbelov taught me to use: GDK_SCALE=1 binaries/system/pyrogenesis -editor instead, and then Atlas does use the full space indeed.
  20. Speaking of which, I recommend: Lionel Casson The Periplus Maris Erythraei : text with introduction, translation, and commentary (Princeton 1989) The Periplus is an unique text, written between AD 40 and 70 in a matter-of-fact style by an experienced Egyptian Greek merchant who evidently sailed himself to the East African coast, Arabia, and Western India. What I find particularly interesting are the points where his account, of the early Roman period, differs from the descriptions of the major geographers (Diodorus Siculus, Strabo, Pliny), which reflect the situation in Ptolemaic times. Casson's book contains a wealth of information, is reliable, and worth a read.
  21. True, the Sahara is significantly larger today than it was in the 3rd C BC and the surrounding areas a lot more arid. However, what I meant was that the Sahara was a desert in Antiquity, i.e. hostile to elephants, and the situation during the African Humid Period (nice term!) is not relevant for the Hellenistic period. The Libyan (Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco) and Ethiopian (Sudan, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia) elephants were two completely separate populations. The Sudan and Sahel have probably moved a great deal to the south in the past millennia and Lake Chad and Lake Yoa used to be many times larger than they're now, so yes, it's certainly possible there were still elephants there in Hellenistic times. However, assuming there were elephants in the Tibesti mountains and the Ptolemies were aware of that, there is still the problem how they could have sent tame elephants there and brought back captured wild elephants to Egypt, given the desert in between. Exactly! When populations are isolated, they tend to diverge, there is nothing unusual about that. It's the simplest and least problematic explanation for the small African war elephants. Anyway, I believe we're basically in agreement, we just have different backgrounds and ways of expressing ourselves.
  22. That could be the location of Herodotus Trogodites, yes. However, in later authors the term refers exclusively to the Red Sea coast. The difference could be in how or where they were obtained; see also the Casson (1993) article linked earlier. One explanation might be that Ethiopia here refers to the kingdom of Meroë (i.e. Kush). There is also evidence for elephant remains in Northern Tunisia during the 9th century BC: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352409X16302693 Yes, Northern Tunisia belongs to the same geographic area as Northern Algeria. It was also a lot more fertile than it is today. Elephants could have roamed throughout the Mediterranean coastal strip. The Sahara alternates between complete desert and green savanna every 10,000 years or so, thus there were probably some elephants when the area was green in the Neolithic, but in Hellenistic times the Sahara was a desert, like now.
  23. Luckily the livius.org page linked earlier has an identifier of the inscription: OGIS 54. Found it: https://epigraphy.packhum.org/text/218979 [EDIT]: and: https://archive.org/details/orientisgraeciin01dittuoft/page/85/mode/2up : In ipso lapide sine dubio Τρωγοδυτικῶν scriptum fuit.
  24. The classical sources could be explained either way, hence the debate in modern scholarship. What is needed is both critical thinking and common sense. Paraphrasing Fichte for the most plausible solution: thesis: African elephants had turrets. antithesis: African elephants could impossibly have had turrets. synthesis: African elephants may occassionally have had turrets. Herodotus' world view is fairly straightforward: to the East of the Nile is Asia, to the West Libya, to the South Aithiopia. This remained more or less accepted for about two millennia. Herodotus' entry on the Trogodytes is in IV.183: Given their position in the text, it's clear Herodotus locates them somewhere in the Sahara. This is not the case for later authors (Diodorus Siculus, Strabo, etc.), where Τρωγοδυτική means the lands on the Red Sea coast, opposite Arabia. From Pliny Naturalis Historia book VI: With “Troglodytic and Ethiopian elephants” the inscription means elephants from the coast (T) and interior (E). If Ptolemy III had any Libyan elephants, they would have been called as such; also note “the kingdom of Egypt and Libya [i.e. Cyrenaica]” etc. earlier in the inscription. Moreover, I doubt there were any elephants in the Northern Sahara steppe in Classical times; Carthage seems to have captured them in the woodlands surrounding the Atlas mountains (Morocco and Northern Algeria). What I want to know is whether that inscription really has a λ. Some manuscripts do, presumably because of association with τρώγλη (LSJ: an hole formed by gnawing, esp. a mouse's hole; plural: caves; holes in clothes; of canals in the flesh), but the correct form appears to be Τρωγοδύται, without the λ.
  25. Why? I did a grep in the simulation folder, and neither 'actor_mask' nor 'actor.png' showed up. I don't know for sure. I assume those values were introduced for a reason. For me, though, multiples of 0.5 are good enough. What do you mean exactly? I understand, but you can browse the mod files on github. It's basically a regular dodecagram {12/5} in a circle, hence why I named it `circled_dodecagram`; you can find it, along with several other, similar shapes, under here. An octogonal shape is fairly easy to write, e.g. last_octagon.svg.
  • Create New...