Leaderboard

Frankly, I actually do enjoy the quest two of you are into as your both try using arguments and evidence as far as possible instead of entering into personal attack mode (which is too often the case today). Your examples and references - although not conclusive for me - are providing new insights and background in any case. To me as a complete ignoramus in this subject (except for being a native German speaker), it is of course impossible to decide for clear right or clear wrong. Maybe it is not possible at all as Germanic tribes of that time might have been quite diverse? Should we try finding a more generic solution that could be good enoughfor players to grasp the spirit? Three words describing three phases (knowing that some tribes of that time did not (yet) develop cities as you wrote). Afer all this is a simplified game.

I was recently calculating whats a better investment for food trickle, a ice house or a farmstead and cows garrisoned. ICE HOUSE (Limit: 5) Base building: Cost: 100 stone, 100 wood Build time: 60 s Trickle: 1 food / 2 s (0.5 food/s) Aqueduct upgrade: Cost: 300 stone, 300 wood Research: 40 s Trickle: 2 food / 2 s (1.0 food/s) 5 ICE HOUSES (max): 5 × (100 stone + 100 wood) = 500 stone, 500 wood 1 × (300 stone + 300 wood) = 300 stone, 300 wood Total resources: 1600 Total trickle: 5 food/s Cost per 1 food/s: 1600 / 5 = 320 resources CORRAL + COWS (Limit: 50 cows) Corral: Cost: 100 wood Build time: 50 s Capacity: 8 cows Cows: Cost: 150 food Produce: 60 s Trickle: 3 food / 3 s (1.0 food/s) 7 CORRALS + 50 COWS (max cows): 7 × 100 wood = 700 wood 50 × 150 food = 7500 food Total resources: 8200 Total trickle: 50 food/s Cost per 1 food/s: 8200 / 50 = 164 resources Summary: Ice House: 320 resources per 1 food/s Corral + Cows: 164 resources per 1 food/s Corrals win by far. I think the ice houses should be better considering they are a civ specialty.

It is indeed quite difficult to find exact equivalents for village, town, and city in Proto-Germanic, but Wufila's Bible is a truly incredible resource for this, as he had to translate many Greek terms into Gothic so that they would be understandable to the Goths. In Wufila's Bible, there is a sort of hierarchy with Haims << Baurgs and Weihs << Baurg. Haim- is used for villages and hamlets. To designate less densely populated rural communities. A few examples: Mark 6:56 : ...jah þisƕaduh þadei iddja in haimos aiþþau baurgs aiþþau in weihsa... / ...And whithersoever he entered, into villages, or cities, or country... Mark 5:14 : ...gataihun in baurg jah in haimom. / ...they announced it in the city and in the countryside. Mark 11:2 : ...gaggats in haim þo wiþrawairþon iggqis... / ...go your way into the village over against you... Luke 9:52 : ...galiþun in haim Samareite... / ...entered into a village of the Samaritans... Luke 19:30 : ...in þo wiþrawairþon haim.../ ...in the village across the way... Luke 5:17 : ...þaiei wesun gaqumanai us allamma haimo Galeilaias... / ...which were come out of every village of Galilee... Luke 17:12 : ...jah inngaggandin imma in suma haimo, gamotidedun imma taihun þrutsfillai mans... / ...And as he entered into a certain village, there met him ten men that were lepers... Matthew 9:35 : jah bitauh Iesus baurgs allos jah haimos laisjands in gaqumþim ize... / And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues... Luke 8:1 : ...ei jah is wratoda and baurgs jah haimos merjands... / ...that he went throughout every city and village... Luke 9:6 : ...and haimos wailamerjandans... / ...and went through the villages... Luke 9:12 : ...ei galeiþandans in þos bisunjane haimos jah weihsa saljaina... / ...that they may go into the villages and country round about... Mark 8:26 : ...ni in þata weihs gaggais, ni mannhun qiþais in þamma wehsa. / ... Don't even go into the village, nor tell anyone in the village. Luke 8:34 : ...jah gataihun in baurg jah in weihsa. / ...and went and told it in the city and in the country. The issue with Þaurp is that it is mentioned only a single time in a fragment of the Old Testament in Gothic (Codex Ambrosianus D) and it can only mean in this case 'farmland' or 'estate' because it is used for Nehemiah 5:16. It cannot refer to a village or a hamlet in this context, it is a field.

The original Latin text is the following: "Nullas Germanorum populis urbes habitari satis notum est, ne pati quidem inter se iunctas sedes. Colunt discreti ac diversi, ut fons, ut campus, ut nemus placuit. Vicos locant non in nostrum morem conexis et cohaerentibus aedificiis: suam quisque domum spatio circumdat, sive adversus casus ignis remedium sive inscitia aedificandi." Note that he uses the word "vicos" (accusative plural of vicus). So for him, they are like vici, not like villae, aedes, casae or domus. If these were truly isolated, solitary farmsteads miles apart from one another, the word vicus would actually be quite misleading. By choosing this terminology, Tacitus is making a specific point about the Germanic social structure. He describes dwellings that form local communities. Here is why he uses that specific term even if the houses don't touch. In fact, it doesn't really matter whether the buildings are close to each other or not. The real question is whether it is a territorial unit. Consequently, did the Germanic peoples give a name to this group of buildings? I think so. And I think that the word *haima- is more appropriate in this case. Because it is a terminology that can be applied to a family, a clan, or a tribe. I am reposting the description from the Deutsches Ortsnamenbuch (2017): -heim (page 254) -heim. Germ. *haima- ‘Home of a tribe’ (Heimat) ; in the individual Germanic languages with various stem formations and genders, e.g.: OHG heima Fem. ‘Home, homeland, residence’, late OHG/MHG heim Neutr. ‘Homeland, dwelling place, house’, OSax. hēm Neutr., MLG hēm(e) Fem. / hēm also Neutr., OFris. hām / hēm Masc. or Neutr., ON heimr Masc., OE hām Masc. ‘Village, estate’, Goth. haims Fem. ‘Village, small town’. The latter meaning likely applied from the beginning to -heim group settlements, although -heim originally occurred for individual settlements (farmsteads) as well. The -heim names, like those ending in -ingen, show characteristics of great age. They likely occurred sporadically as designations as early as the early phase (around the birth of Christ) and then became common during the early land acquisition (frühn Landnahme) of the 3rd–5th centuries (perhaps also as a translation of the Latin villa). In contrast to the PN-orientation (personal name) of -ingen names, the defining factor here is possession (‘Home / Estate of ...’). By the Merovingian period, the type was fully established and remained productive until the Middle Ages (MA), though varying by region. The fact that the -heim type played practically no role in the area of the Ostsiedlung (Eastern settlement) suggests its simultaneous unproductivity in the Altland (ancient lands). Most -heim names have a PN as the specific element (Bw.), usually in the genitive case. Younger names are mostly those formed with appellatives (common nouns), of which the schematically oriented ones with Nord-, Süd-, Ost-, West-, Berg-, Tal-, etc. (“Bethge-type”) certainly represent the result of Frankish-controlled naming in the vicinity of former royal estates or fisks; these predominantly arose in the 7th/8th centuries. The geographical occurrence of -heim names essentially corresponds to that of -ingen names in locations favorable for settlement; however, a striking distribution of the two types is evident particularly in the Upper and Middle Rhine regions, which can be explained by "compensation" and "radiation," as is known from dialectology. Notable are the mixed forms -ingheim, which occur with varying distribution in Westphalia, Lower Saxony (NI), Hesse (HE), Thuringia (TH), in the Rhineland, and further south. In addition to -heim, dialectal variants are encountered early on, some of which are fixed in official settlement names (SiN), such as -ham, -hem / -hēm, -um, -em, -an, -en, -m, -n, -a, -e, or total loss (elision). Literature: Bach DNK II, 2; Schuster I; Wiesinger 1994; Jochum-Godglück; NOB III; Debus / Schmitz, H.-G. FD I am also adding the translated definition from ortsnamen.ch which is the digital portal for place-name research (onomastics) in Switzerland. heim [related] to Middle High German heim (strong neuter noun) ‘house, home, place’, < Germanic *haimaz (Gothic haims, feminine: ‘village, countryside in contrast to the city’; Old Norse heimr, masculine: ‘home, residence, homeland; inhabited earth; earthly world; world, earth, region of the world’, heima, neuter: ‘home, dwelling place, place of residence; house’). The name-type -heim, which is widespread across a large part of the German-speaking area, is only sparsely attested as an ancient form in German-speaking Switzerland. Usually, ancient -heim is combined with a personal name [PN] as the defining element (Bestimmungswort), thereby naming a hamlet or a village and its leader. In contrast, in Switzerland, the so-called "Bethge-type" (named after the founder of this research approach, Oskar Bethge) is most prevalent. This consists of more or less schematic names composed of appellative defining elements (e.g., Kirch- [church], Mül(l)- [mill], Talheim [valley-home]) or with adjectives (e.g., Neuheim [new-home]), which are to be attributed to the influence of Frankish administration in the 8th/9th century. In Switzerland, heim-names are found increasingly in the northern territory (Kilchmann 54). There are two Gothic 'weihs' in the Gothic bible. One is used for 'holy' and 'saint' while the other one is used for village. When it translates the Greek kōmē (Marc 8:23), it is obviously a village. When it translates the word agroi (in plural), it also means villages or it means countryside because of the context. Because agros means different things. The only reason I chose it as my second choice is that it seems to have been used much later, in the early Middle Ages, to refer in some cases to small Roman towns. Settlements which were more urbanized than the usual Germanic settlement. Anyway, it is also interesting because it is already mentioned in Gothic with a meaning that designates a kind of settlement, which is 4 centuries earlier than the later evidences. In Gothic bible, it seems Weihs was equivalent to Haims. My point of view is mainly to take a critical approach to linguistic reconstructions. These reconstructions are based solely on phonological rules and sound laws. A reconstruction is not a semantic analysis. That's why I prefer words that are closer chronologically. And the Gothic Bible provides an excellent case study for semantic analysis. Here what the Deutsches Ortsnamenbuch (2017) says about it: -wik / -wiek (page 692): Old Saxon wīk ‘dwelling, village’, Middle Low German wīk ‘place, settlement, (sea) bay’, Old/Middle High German wīch (masculine) ‘residence, city’ has been a subject of controversial debate regarding its origin and meaning. While older research assumed a loanword from Latin vīcus (‘quarter / city district, farmstead, manor, hamlet’) or assumed the meaning ‘trading/market place’ based on the North Germanic vīk (‘bay’), wīk has more recently been traced back to a Germanic word related to the same root as Latin vīcus, with the original meaning of ‘fence.’ This meaning evolved further in various contexts, for example, to ‘manor’ or ‘small settlement,’ and eventually to ‘district with special legal status or immunity’ (linked to terms like wikbelde / -greve). -wīk names are encountered in: Nordic countries and England; Particularly in the Dutch-Flemish region; In the Lower Saxon-Westphalian area (e.g., Braunschweig, NI); In Schleswig-Holstein (e.g., Schleswig; Wyk auf Föhr, District of Nordfriesland). This formation type likely dates back to the period of land development (Landesausbau) in its productive phase; in the Western Netherlands, it remained active until the 12th/13th century. Literature: Bach DNK II, 2; Schütte 1976; Debus / Schmitz, H.-G. FD

We've been using the name for 26 years which is legal ground by itself. 0ad and WFG are under the patronage of SPI the non profit behind debian and arch linux. Should we have legal issues they are the ones we would sollicit

This isn't the first time software that claims to be free has been commercialized; it's not a matter of personal opinion but a legal one. US laws, along with international agreements on intellectual property and trademark use, allow you to use and distribute it for profit or non-profit purposes, and this game is distributed under those terms, whether we like it or not. Anyway, I agree with Stan. Trying to sell an open-source project on a massive platform like Steam should have at least been discussed with the development team or the lead developer, not for legal reasons but rather ethical ones. For example, I would have talked to the Wildfiregames studio and proposed a mechanism of paying for DLC while the game is free to download, and splitting the profits between the developers and the publishing team (myself), who is also in charge of advertising and other tasks. This would have created a mutual benefit where none currently exists, and it would have benefited everyone. I think that would have been the right thing to do. But I mention again, the 0AD project license is already defined and that license allows anyone to distribute the software and sell it as long as they hand over the source code: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney And in https://play0ad.com/ says: The message on the official website is clear: if someone is selling 0AD, you can still download it for free. However, this doesn't mean that someone can't be selling 0AD, or that they're a bad person or the devil for putting a price on something that's free. In the case of Steam, people are free to pay to maintain the convenience of using 0AD on Steam, Steam Deck, Steam Machine, compatibility with community-created controllers, using the Steam social network to share games, etc., or they can simply download it for free from the official website and deal with dependencies, manual updates, Wayland scaling issues, and so on. People will still be free to choose. This is similar to a sales scenario where a bag of flour at the market might cost you $1, but at the store across the street, it might cost $4. The store owner isn't being exploitative; you're simply paying for the convenience of not having to travel almost two hours to the market, paying tolls and spending money on gas while the sun beats down on your skin. The $3 difference isn't for the product's value, but for the convenience of having it right at your doorstep. In this case, having 0ad at a reasonable price wouldn't be considered theft. The price isn't for the software itself, but for the work involved in publishing it, paying Steamworks, and completing all the paperwork. I really hope that Wildfiregames will release it on Steam someday, but if someone else does it and charges for it, I won't judge them; on the contrary, I'll congratulate them. Remember the case of nexuiz, xonotic and the 2012 steam version, when the leader of the classic PC nexuiz project sold the rights and thanks to the fact that the game was published under a gnu gpl2 license (just like 0ad) they were able to create two forks, one called xonotic that is still free and another modified by the company illfonic implementing cryengine and that launched on steam and charges for each download. What would scare me a bit is if Microsoft claimed some patent issues with the game mechanics (similar to Age of Empires). Since it's a free game, there's no way to make a legal claim because there's no malicious intent, but if it's sold, that's a different story. By example: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8882594B2/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US20070207844 https://patents.google.com/patent/US20030008696A1/en

You two should get a room, lol.