Here is what the LLM ended up with, take it with caution, but to me it seems kind of plausible. Some approximations have been made. One builder just build sequential houses, corrals or fields. Usually its more. The walking distances are neglected. Targeted are ~38.9 f/s. All resources are just pooled together. Realistically its also a big factor that one gathers wood and get food at the fields, while at the corrals you don't have so much food to invest at the start, except if you start out with elephants (or other plenty of fauna) nearby. The one big benefit with the corrals is that you need a lot less pop. Also this pop is way better as it can be used to attack.       farms_vs_corrals.py

Hello everyone, I am not here to contest a moderation decision nor to deny the legitimacy of a sanction when behavior crosses the line. Moderation exists and their work is sacred. What I want to share, however, is a reflection on what we sometimes lose when a player leaves (or is removed) durably from 0 A.D. JC is not an angel, he has had words too much, moments of anger, perhaps even statements that none of us would want to see reappear in the chat or on the forum. That deserves warning and sanction. On the other hand I am convinced that exclusion, even temporary, is not justified. If the moderators judge it useful, they can mute him permanently from the lobby. Then the players must protect themselves from him: There is autociv to mute a player or simply avoid him like a nuisance in the games. He did not seek to harm in a dangerous way against the project. Like DDoS or that kind of thing. Every player also represents something else: hundreds of hours spent playing, testing, reporting sometimes very technical bugs memorable games (good or catastrophic) that made dozens of people laugh, rant, progress a sincere love for this free project, born more than twenty years ago from passion accumulated knowledge on mechanics, civilizations, strategies, which he shared (even if sometimes with a bit too much salt) 0 A.D. is not a commercial game with a moderation budget. It is a project carried by volunteers, passionate people, and a relatively small but faithful community. Every regular player who leaves is a real loss for this ecosystem. We can afford to have a different functioning. We can claim to have a game above the others. A dogma to protect and leave in free access. Sanction firmly, yes. But applying a ban, is sometimes punishing the community as much as the individual. Many of us have already been young, impulsive, under caffeine at 2am after a raging defeat, or simply clumsy with our words. Some of us were lucky: a warning, a temporary mute, a private discussion with a more patient moderator… and we are still here today. I am not asking for general amnesty nor for the immediate return of JC. I am simply asking that we ask ourselves the question: Can we dehumanize him and consider him only as a lambda player who must have access to the game. Like a basic right. I am not even talking about second or tenth chance, he will do it again for sure. It is not by laxism that I propose to unban him. I consider that what happens in the games is private therefore not moderatable. If he wants to be the biggest villain on earth, he can, it is up to the player to avoid him. Thank you for reading until here. Whatever happens, I will continue to love this game and the people (even the ranters) who make it live. Kindly,

I guess your right, I read that message wrong.

It will help for sure. But it might not be that much better.

I understand is not something easy to fix, or better say "update" (because it is working). But doing it will be a really big jump for 0 A.D.