niektb

out of curiosity, Phoenix, what code do you use for conversion? Something like this: https://github.com/0ADMods/convert_attack (not sure if it still works)?

Currently I don't think another indiegogo campaign would make much sense since the money of the old campaign isn't even used yet! (and the license of the game is CC-BY-SA 3.0)

I haven't forgotten nor lost my interest in Millennium A.D. but lacked the time to work actively on it. (I did however some major balance changes). You right that we hadn't posted any updates, this is because we hadn't produced anything worth showable. I will however try to pick up Millennium A.D. as soon as I can

Or even better, install Lubuntu. 512MB RAM is enough to run that distro.

But is the difference between a simple and a spiked collar easily visible at longer ranges?

Alpha 16 or 17?

About Liu Bang: He was born as a farmer's son and led a peasant rebellion, right? That (and some other smaller stuff) gave us actually the idea to train him from the farmstead, give a global farming boost and bonus the attack of basic ranked soldiers nearby him.

The Ji seems to correspond with the references, the dagger is a bit sharper (smaller and longer) in the reference but I think it is best to keep it this way to keep it visible in bird view.

This. web. looks. very. cool! There is only one issue I see, how do we implement that in the GUI?

I have a remark on your texture, Enrique: The paws (especially the front ones) tend to have much more black in it. Also the front of the ears are white (with a little black). An image to illustrate what I mean:

I think it is important to make sure that stuff from a later period doesn't get deleted but moved instead to the corresponding mod (such as millennium ad). I'll respond to various stuff (as you seem to be finished) asap.

I think stone has a broader usage than creating slingers only (correct me if I'm wrong). When you look at the tech tree of the Britons Slingers are indeed the only units that cost stone, but what do you think of Walls, Towers and Fortresses? Also the rotary mills cost stone which can boost your farming. Researching the stone tech doesn't necessarily penalize you in the long run. Right?

A quick question: these feathered hats could also be used for the elite infantry archer?

Hebrews (or Israelites) would be a strange choice to me to add. Except for the Maccabean revolt there happened nothing mention-worthy in the time span 500 B.C. - 1 B.C. (being conquered is not really mention-worthy). If that's everything I think there are better candidates to be added (if there were any civs to be added).

It depends a bit on the OS, on linux I could recall Zippy's steps were more or less correct. On Windows (assuming with TortoiseSVN): https://make.wordpress.org/core/handbook/working-with-patches/apply-a-patch-using-tortoisesvn/

...unless you combine them in tiers as I suggested... Edit: wowgetoffyourcellphone was first

Yes, Prodigal Son has spent quite some time to get a list in this thread: http://www.wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=19182 In the TS, scroll a bit down to faction-specifics. But I agree that thread also adresses other stuff.

The main thing I wanted to express with that phrase (and I repeated it later on) is that you make a decision that cannot be altered afterwards and hence that decision needs to be taken carefully.

Mimo: in that case you would combine multiple AB's. With one AB my point is still valid.

I agree with Stan here. In this thread were not talking about adding new features (to which applies what feneur says) but about the current implementation of a (very) important aspect of an RTS game. We shouldn't diverge here and end up with 10 (just a number) different technology mods!!! Mind if I do a small analysis on technologies? DISCLAIMER: This analysis assumes that the paired technologies are related to each other, could logically exist independently from each other (trade-off stats technologies is not what I'm talking about here, these technologies should always be in pairs) and are equally powerful (this depends on the player's strategy though). Also the cost wouldn't be different whether standalone or in pairs. There are a couple of things we need to consider when talking about technologies. Resources, time and choice (+results of that choice). The paired technologies will be refered to as AB (either technology A or B ). The standalone technologies as YN (Yes or no (or at least not right now)). A / B-technologies; The nature of paired technologies is that researching of one means a hard exclusion of the other. This means that the player needs to choose which technology of the two suits his strategy best. And not only that, he also needs to estimate whether the desired paired technology is worth the cost. Y / N-technologies: When it comes to amount of choices YN offers 2 cost-estimating choices compared to 1 cost-estimation and 1 A/B (one or the other, which suits best?) choice. This means that (it comes to making choices solely) the amount is equal, the nature of these choices is however different. With YN the immediate result of the choice to research it is largely dependend on the opposing player. What has he done with his resources (and the time to obtain these)? Has he been idling around (for example), it would mean that the negative impact is nullifiable. The opposite would mean that the research created a certain kind of 'disadvantage' (that is in the longer run being compensated by the bonus the tech gave). Player skill and the amount of resources is the determining factor here. AB has a more definite character. Without too much fantasy a player could become his own worst enemy by making ill-decisions that do not suit his playing style. This requires more care to the player when choosing technologies to research. With YN poor choices are still possible but they can be equalized (by researching the other tech) at the expense of some more resources (and time to obtain these). Technically this narrows the problem down to one question: To what extend should the player be penalized for poor decision-taking? This question is not as black and white as it might seem. There are a couple of things that need to be taken into account when answering this question. What does it for example mean for the strategic freedom? What we should avoid at all cost is forcing the players down to a predefined set of playing strategies. Therefore hard branching of the technologies (economy vs military and that kind of stuff) is no good idea. ---END of the analysis--- As you might have noticed I tried to be as much objective as possible in the analysis so everyone can read the facts and make his/her own conclusion. I would however do some final (personal) words (my conclusion): I personally like a mix of the various types described above. I think there shouldn't be solely paired techs or solely standalone techs. I think however that a pure AB-choice is too unforgiving against poor decision-taking and limits strategic freedom too much (the chance is quite high that it forces players down to fixed strategies as some early game strategies and unbeneficial in the long run, unless the pairs are extremely well thought out), I therefore would like to see them in tiers. (With every tier level becoming available with the next phase, summing up to 3 levels) That way they can be (partially?) compensated but it needs more time to do so (till next phase + the time to gather the required amount of resources). SIDENOTE: I would like to see icons that show a tier number.

Not really official but this could be something: http://www.wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=17326

Considering the fact that it isn't in this list: http://www.wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=17730 I doubt it would be added to the game. You could however push it there as a suggestion Till then use wild horses instead?

Yes. He has an Intel integrated graphics (I think) and he needs to enable GLSL in the options menu.

Although they certainly add a new strategic depth I doubt it is a good idea to put stuff that is such complicated into a game like 0 A.D. This especially counts for the PVE part. I personally think there could be some additional depth into economy and decision-taking however. PVE would make 0 A.D. much more a kind of simulation (like Banished). Of course there could be scenarios that require a different style of playing (as they can technically add additional gameplay using triggers) or mods that could do so. For stamina I don't think it would be a good idea to separate the gameplay on small maps from large® maps. To summarize: I (personally) prefer the 0 A.D. vanilla game to be as 'clean' as possible. No (possibly) overcomplicated gameplay mechanics but more the kind of 'easy to learn but hard to master' style. (But it would be good of course to give mods the ability to add such gameplay of course). You're not the only one that wants this . I believe this is more or less planned for Alpha 18 ((in)formal?)