Leaderboard

We need five more AI names added to Claodicus, Divico and Caesorix. As we already had some intense debate on Specific Phase names for the Germans I thought we might get some input from the community as well (i.e. @Genava55 and @Thalatta). Background @Vantha already reported Issue #8404 back in October: Suggestion Of course we could reuse the Hero names Boiorix, Teutobod und Lugius, but making it more diverse sounds good to me. What do you think?

@wowgetoffyourcellphone and I actually started the mod on Gitea but we haven't committed anything yet.

It's good to return to a more reasonable position. I would remind you that in 2021, there were proposals to replace Boudicca in order to respect this cutoff. Especially if the team members decide to make Empires Besieged an official mod that simply adds content (notably new playable civilizations), it has to be flexible. Historical cultures that fall on both sides of this arbitrary boundary will pose a problem otherwise.

I know, I saw the repo. This is a good idea but again I want to advise you that you should really avoid carving up certain civs just to force them into one side of the fence. For example, with the Germanic peoples, I find it clumsy to restrict oneself to representing either the period before our era or the period after our era. You will have this problem with other civs like the Dacians and the Parthians. It's best to put these kinds of civs in Empires Besieged rather than Empires Ascendant. Since Empires Besieged is a kind of expansion, it is less of a problem to have a civ that includes some of its elements that date back to the period before our era. I understand that you did not want Empires Ascendant to extend into the period of our era. It seems that this is the key point of contention. So it's better to accept some overlap in the other direction. If the mod includes civs with characters and references that span both periods, it's much less of a problem than if it were the base game.

I suppose the - 500 B.C. and 0 A.D cutoff, but I suppose +- 20 years isn't that bad

Hero names were specifically removed from the AI names a while ago (https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/commit/22cbd39bbd46d1bf2e87b8c26ae58f28a6d6fa1e), so that's not an option, unfortunately.

Debate is scientifically very valuable and it seems that you both know a lot about the topic (certainly more than me). But please keep a professional tone and don't get personal. There's nothing wrong with someone simply because they disagree, especially since the language is resconstructed anyway, so there is no right and wrong, just more plausible and less plausible. I think you both made fair points, and with the knowledge I have I honestly am unable to decide which is the better option. Seems right, thanks, I can add it to the PR.

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 < Weihs < Baurgs. Haim- is used for villages and hamlets. To designate less densely populated rural communities. A few examples: Mark 6:36 : ...galeiþandans in bisitandans haimos jah weihsa... / ...that they go to the surrounding countryside and villages... Mark 5:14 : ...gataihun in baurg jah in haimom. / ...they announced it in the city and in the countryside. John 7:42 : ...us Beþlaiaim þamma haima... / ... from the village of Bethlehem... Luke 19:30 : ...in þo wiþrawairþon haim.../ ...in the village across the way... Mark 8:27 : ...in haimos Kaisarias þais Filippaus. / ...in the villages of Caesarea Philippi. 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.