Forums
-
Welcome
-
- 5,3k
- posts
-
- 38,5k
- posts
-
- 16,5k
- posts
-
-
0 A.D.
-
- 49,9k
- posts
-
- 27,7k
- posts
-
- 47,7k
- posts
-
- 31k
- posts
-
- 44k
- posts
-
- 148
- posts
-
- 600
- posts
-
- Who Else?
- By AlexHerbert,
-
-
Who's Online 11 Members, 5 Anonymous, 248 Guests (See full list)
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
.thumb.png.f3f47d08fd1bf1063ea4b371390681b4.png)
@trompetin17 "in your GUI XML" which file do you mean? and where do we need to place it? -
By ittihat_ve_terakki · Posted
I’ve really stepped out of debate mode, at least with you, because what you said is valuable and you made it clear you want to focus on the conversation. So my question was sincere. I’m curious about your thoughts on having units in the game that didn’t exist in the time of 0 AD. I don’t want to drag the topic out so I completely understand if you’d rather not go into it. I usually see you guys playing regularly together so I mentioned friendship but really, you could replace the word “friendship” with anything you like, it doesn’t matter. Yes you’re not responsible for his words, but you are responsible for your contribution to how the general discussion evolved, but you’ve already noticed that. -
By guerringuerrin · Posted
He is not my friend, nor is anyone else who has spoken here. What we all have in common is that we are part of this community. In that sense, we are colleagues. I am not responsible for their opinions, and I am not responsible if members of this community who agree with you choose not to explain to the rest of us why they think it’s a bad change. You did, and that’s valuable.. We simply disagree on what adds something and what doesn’t. End of story. I agree with you, and I have tried to remain focused on the substance of the issue, despite some unfortunate wording on my part. Yes, it is very annoying to have to respond to many people at the same time. I would feel overwhelmed. I also hate 3v1 unbalanced mainland, by the way I think we have both made our arguments very clear. I don’t believe there is anything to gain from continuing this discussion just to repeat them. -
By ittihat_ve_terakki · Posted
I commend your self-reflection here. Maintaining a certain level of discourse is crucial. Take a look at your friend's approach for example: He is reducing the issue to something trivial, invalidating it with irony and mocking it, acting like a high school student. But none of that addresses the core of the matter: what has this change actually added to the game? Is it necessary? While I’ve been focusing on these thoughts, someone else chimes in with, "When I woke up, he was ranting about the topic and he’s still ranting when I’m back lol. It's really funny seeing him trying to counter the 'woke agenda' XDD." Maybe we're not realizing it but through all the hype, groupthink and attempts to trivialize the issue, the quality of the conversation is genuinely declining. Birds add something to the experience. Even if they don't directly affect gameplay, they serve as "eye candy", those subtle details that enhance the feeling the game gives you. Sometimes you can just look at games as you're gazing at a landscape painting. Or even the variety of tree species, it's valuable and it's richness. Personally, I don't see the removal of "Women" as a positive development because it doesn’t elevate anything. Replacing "Women" with a mixed-gender unit doesn’t enrich the game. Men were already present, so this doesn’t add diversity. Do you think Cleopatra should stay in the game? If so, why? -
By guerringuerrin · Posted
You are right. I should have chosen my words carefully and not be part of unneccesary jokes and comments that only added noise to the discussion. I'm sorry for that. I mean it. That was my fault. I have no problem with free expression. Critiquing an argument is not censorship. Here I need to defend my position, because I genuinely think this is an exaggeration. Does having a few birds flying around really add nothing to the game? Or having three different models for the same unit? By your definition, none of that would add anything, and I disagree with that premise.There will always be a cut-off point somewhere. You can always argue that something is unnecessary. That’s why I don’t think it’s a strong argument, because by that logic, something will always be “missing.” This project aims to be historically accurate. And I do believe this adds something to the game. It may be meaningless to some people, perhaps even to the majority; we don’t really know. But I think it helps reflect what I mentioned before about families and communities being central to agricultural life. But you are right, we can disagree. Have a good day.
-
