"My observation is that 'reza' tends to be toxic. I believe 'MarcAurel' is fair and should continue to moderate in that way. A report from someone who has been punished and is often aggressive may not be considered credible."

@Stan` I would like to raise some concerns about the way moderation is handled by MarcAurel in 0 A.D. I feel his decisions are sometimes inconsistent and too personal, which can negatively affect the community. For example, when someone insults him directly, he reacts strongly. In one case, I was muted for an entire week because I used the word “retard” against him. Similarly, DoctorOrgans was banned for calling him “passive aggressive soyboy.” While I understand that moderators should act against offensive language, the punishment lengths are not clearly defined in 0 A.D., and it seems that harsher actions are taken only when the insult is directed at him personally. At the same time, other players such as Atric frequently insult me and DoctorOrgans (often because we accuse him of cheating), yet no moderation action is taken against them. This gives the impression that MarcAurel enforces rules selectively, protecting his friends while punishing his critics. Another issue is that cultural differences are not taken into account. What is considered offensive in one culture may not necessarily be so in another. For example, calling someone “passive aggressive soyboy” may sound like an insult to him, but in my view it is more of a description of behavior or lifestyle than an insult. A moderator should be aware that players come from many different cultures and apply rules fairly, not based on personal feelings. Overall, I believe moderation should be impartial and consistent, applied equally to all players regardless of personal relationships. While previous moderators like Nortse_Harlod also had their flaws, I still found them more balanced compared to MarcAurel. My hope is that moderation in 0 A.D. can become more transparent, fair, and community-focused.  

What about expanding the Reforms tech to unlock a champion skirmisher though? Currently you get the legionary swordsmen and skirmisher, but only the first cohort swordsmen, it seems like a first cohort skirmisher would complete the roster as then you can either have a complete first cohort force or a regular one. Centurions I was thinking it would be great if they could swap between javelin and sword so they could lead either unit type without getting left behind by the skirmishers when they do so.

I am open to recommendations 

Yes, it should. Using a VPN would be another option. Also check out the FAQ entry regarding this topic https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/wiki/FAQ#what-shall-i-do-when-joining-multiplayer-matches-fails-with-an-error-message In that case you just require a public IP address from somebody else (Cloudflare in your example). Some kind of public endpoint at which a host is available at will always be necessary. In future we might improve the situation by also supporting IPv6, but that brings its own set of challenges. See https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/issues/4301 for details. You can join games where servers are hosted on public IPs without NAT being involved. That's true for Minecraft, Wuthering Waves, as well as 0ad hosts who do proper port forwarding.

Engine.QuickSave and QuickLoad might make the trick for you if you want to return to a point in game, example : when the overlay is closed, return to the point of when it got opened. It's instantaneous.

My other thought is that if we can improve the engine such that we no longer demand a public IP. Could hosting players use a service like Cloudflare to expose their hosts? With the current setup, I was able to join Minecraft servers and other multiplayer games like Wuthering Waves. Perhaps we can learn something from them?    I could join hosts who have enabled Stun and port forwarded their own router. But for hosts who don't have any of these, there is no chance of joining.