Romulus

Like farms, suppose we can plant forests with a diverse range of seed, once forests become barren. But trees have to take a long time to grow, otherwise this will be unrealistic.

That would be inefficient. If a lumberyard is attached to a farm, then the distance between it and the trees will be long giving workers time gaps. Gathering will be slow. But I rather like the concept of making water important, after all, it is. And without it you die. Settlements, towns and any gathering of a significant number of people requires water, that way adding realism, and stopping CCs being built in ridiculous places.

Yeah this is a great idea

ill have to also suggest and argue that farming as to also be equally as complex. The mechanics of making water accessible to farm. You cannot farm with NO water.

That is actually a feudal age Age of Empires II (briton/celt/frank/spanish) town center

Yes my mind actually not on this subject right now for this discussion. I have had a long day and for that I will excuse myself for this point in time until due course Meanwhile, for all the others that agree with me, voice your concerns. And quantumstate: it would be helpful to gauge your views by exactly why do you think that infinite farming is justifiable, and how do you justify it as being a significant mechanic? If you shed some light on the why's it will help my side of the argument understand yours

I'm not going to break your quotes down because I'm lazy to. But firstly lol... If you can't understand that, then give one good reason why I should help clarify it for you, when you have obviously an opposite opinion? You yourself like the two I mentioned in my com, have ignored the argument. Why should I keep reiterating something so blatantly obvious.... Surely someone else can now seriously. And where AoM have infinite resources???? I probably don't remember, as I haven't played it in years. As for AoE III and WoW... Those SUCK!!!

What can you not understand with that previous statement? Looks pretty readable to me unless English isn't your native language. Second, I did mention that strategy was for the AI ... The picking berries and woman appearing magically is irrelevant to this argument and stupid. As for "other games" which have infinite resources and that's why "other games" suck but 0 A.D. Is not "other games" now is it?

lol... You don't need another box just because MS is being a @#$%. You have to turn off secure boot and enable legacy boot options plus legacy boot devices which are on your box. How to do this exactly depends on what BIOS version/type you are running.

This is a great idea. How many minor battles you win the game is recorded. Although, you have to define how many units are engaging in order to qualify as a "battle" perhaps say like 10 units on either side, doesn't have to be 10 each.

What both of you are failing to acknowledge, is the point of this thread and argument. The point laymans terms, is the way we interact in a strategic way against either AI or humans. The whole nature of "logical" strategy, (i.e. logical meaning relative to reality, and not fantasy), becomes totally flipped on its head and doesn't represent realism that an "historical" RTS is supposed to. The line between fantasy and reality pivots on such mechanics, and the 0 A.D. team has to be aware of this, that it doesn't taint the game with unrealistic elements which destroys gameplay and the whole theme in general. You yourselves need to better assess what's been said before commenting and encouraging such unrealistic methods of game play.

Out of all the possible changes or alterations proposed here, this one has the greatest level of realism. And indeed logical. Farms were indeed "BIG" compared to city space. So this suggestion makes sense.

I know about the political hierarchy of the feudal system. But you misunderstood what I meant. Essentially every ruling class is pyramidal by nature. Feudal system is an elaborate term for it. The true fundamentals of feudalism is, the elevation of the soldier class uplifted with prestige and status, which then would revolve around the lords and barons -- the revival of the aristocracy -- 9th century where the knights got born. A noble "lord" that owned land and farms would also own peasants on these farms, which then would grant the knight taxation in the form of (e.g. cows, pigs, and chickens, cheese, break, milk, and wine) as his personal levy. The knight would share this with his esquires, menatarms and so forth. It was only the church and monarchy that demanded tax in coinage. Knights as well, but the bartering of goods was the last resort to a serf drained of money. But its to simply underline the shear primitivity such simple "tribalism" as this totally conceals within it, a new power game in feudal times. With so many knights "playing the role" of minor "kings", the monarchy at the top doesn't actually own or have a threshold over the lands and people, as an emperor or despot would. This power is with the sub-elite whom erects a totem at work here, the totem of loyalty. Which means the king has a limited capacity at how he can rule over his subjects. Should he overstep a mine field of uncertainty, the loyalty is then altered, turn sour and he his forced to refute his actions and retreat. Its because of the barbaric savagery at the gates that brought with it the seeds of tribalism and from those seeds grew a feudal tree of hierarchy of pretentious rich-folk playing as lords. This primitive government therefore was responsible for the strife, civil unrest, wars, famine and upheaval all through the Medieval world. The foundation of authority which pivoted on oppression, quenched by the brute force that balanced it. Now as for the lead side of things. Firstly there's two arguments 1. What and were their symptoms of lead poisoning? 2. Lead poisoning was the result and fall of Roman rule. Okay let me refute the first myth. But before I do, I know it was a theory you brought up, but I was merely asserting my view on the matter with science to give it basis, and irrespective of what records tells us, science says otherwise. I did it just to add clarity on the greater scope of this subject. Lead poisoning (i.e. Plumbism(medical term)), would of had it's toxicity declined as years went by of continuous water flow. Which would in effect halt the sickness from spreading. Now defrutum could of been the main lead vector responsible, however again, it wouldn't of had any effect and carried itself over the next generation. This is the crux of this argument. Its that plumbism is not an heredity disorder, until only after many, many years for it to actually alter the genes with defective code. Which replicates itself in future generations and therefore induce psychological dysfunction. Its this mere principle that totally debunks this myth. Moreover, conceptually correlation how Romans lived in BC to AD seems blanket the facts of when lead in defrutum was being consume. We have no real records of dates, so the only logical conclusion is that they would of probably had during the Punic wars in early BC. the concept of continuing intake of lead from this time, till the time of it's end, would mean that madness would of set in well in BC still, and would of had pernicious, deleterious effects on the Roman Empire. Concluding that plumbism is not heredity in the time periods in question, outrules it as a viable theory. So in layman's terms, plumbism didn't have enough toxicity, to both cause a genetic defect, and to have induced madness in the elites young years of critical governance, only probably until late on in theirs where is too little time even then to impede the empire's health. ____________________________________________ Which brings that arguments end, and now I shall anwser your question in quote ""Now, if defrutum and lead crockery were of wide use in Byzantium too, only big walls may have made the difference between it and Ravenna. That's your point, isn't it?"" No that was not my point. But before I answer this, this question poses a total mockery of the lead poison theory. If Byzantium used defrutum and lead pipes like Rome, how is it then they lasted thousand years after Rome? It wasn't because of tall mighty walls, its because it didn't exist. My point however back to your question, is that Byzantium's walls was not the difference between the two cities. But that of faith. Byzantium was the first Christian city, and a Rome changed into a guise which coexisted with the barbarity incursion which swept Europe. It was by faith that Roman rule permeated through kingdoms like the black death plague, spreading Roman Catholic law through every kingdom, which clearly shows us here that whilst Byzantium had a share of Rome's old empire, it was Rome's military power, but Rome's law incorporated the whole of Europe... So has it fallen really? Or changed? I would think the later.

Typically cities right from AOE have been made unrealistically. You do not get a farm right on your CC/towncenter/whatever door step? Relly wtf? Final Fantasy? Farms and food cultivation are built outside the boundaries of a city's premises. Once an army lays siege to a town, farmlands and food chains are ceased. Period. And in this situation, there's always going to be space for a farm in city walls, which is total the opposite of reality. This is also something I'd gladly see rectified. A radius, a 40-50 meter circle around your CC that stops you from building farms. This would solve this problem.

Regardless of who and when they took advantage, the Sasanian Empire was still a legitimate empire from 224 to 651

Note I think you have totally ignored the Sasanian Empire 224–651 As you can see the largest in the Islamic world and successors of Parthia after their defeat to the Romans. Essentially, these guys are the Persians.

Yeah that would be great. And yes these are early days, but balancing is one of the important tasks. Infinite farming as is, has no balance whatsoever

Feudal system is nothing more than a tight threshold of regulation of minor pockets of serfs. A taxation not of coinage, but of tangible commodities. Now in my honest opinion and view about the case of lead poisoning is completely false. Reason being is that this seemed to have somehow became a justification based no substantial facts and bases to explain something that is equally fallacious. Why the abrupt tone of certainty you might add? Its because that if we accept this theory to indeed be true, would instantly simultaneously be denying the science and logic of the matter. One reason that there hasn't been a scientific probe launched to cut the justification in half, is because it serves the purpose to remain a theory in the mainstream orthodoxy of history, comforted with acceptance by the schools and universities because it is considered viable and legit. Which is totally ironic and typical. But if we challenge this, and threaten to venture into the dark forest of suspicion conspiracies that surround it, we begin to see the fresh meadow oasis of sensible clarity right in the center of it. For let's take a look at some statistical facts: First let's assess the time when the first Roman wine recipe began to hit the Roman shelves in the market. Defrutum. Defrutum was a mixture of lead and wine mixed with a variety of fruit pulp sapa which was considered to possess a great taste. The date of its actual appearance, let alone consumption is not clear. Let's assume that it was in use during Punic wars What then? Well nothing. Because let's a generation get lead poisoning to the degree where madness sets will be close in your forties way exceeding the average life expectancy. That means they couldn't of been consuming that much lead and note: that too, from water out of lead pipes. So therefore if lead poisoning was the case, its not medically possible for someone to become mad in their early days consuming lead, it take far lot longer. And how does this explain the later generation in AD that were involved in the narrative of a collapsing empire? This theory of lead poisoning assumes that its therefore an heredity disposition which is totally incorrect. It does become an heredity factor only after thousands of years for the damage to actually manipulate the DNA of these people involved. That is to say, not every Roman did consume lead in the first place. Another token that throws a pilum in the Gallic wedding cake, is the fact that lead pipes are like copper pipes. We know today in plumbing that copper pipes through in no less than approximately 4-5 years of continuous water flow, forms a a coat layer of grunge inside the pipe of the fresh copper wall. Composed of grime, fluoride, algae, and copper erosion along with trace elements forms a total protective skin in the pipe reducing gradually the intake of copper content. And lead pipes are no different. So what if we assume that it would take 80 years to form a grime layer, that's not even 1/2 of the Empires timeline to have then caused a psychological impact decades in advance till the time of collapse delving into a decadent pitfall. So an logical, sensible conclusion is that lead was not the suspect which impacted Rome's "fall" but it was simply reallocated in the impenetrable walls of Constantinnople which lasted for another thousand years of Roman rule.

Sure, I can make it bigger and have it alpha (transparent) which you can make a bigger banner with if you choose. As for the sig itself, I'm still working on it

I thought The Centurion is a great title for articles relating to strategy Anyways straight to the point, to best of my knowledge infinite farming started in Alpha 15, which means the cost of farming has zeroed making them an extremely valuable source of income, rendering wood, iron and stone mines obsolete. But this isn't entirely the case if one analyzes a means in which to combat this, to effectively starve an enemy. Such a modification on the farms, greatly impacts various Roman strategies, where the effect of starving an enemy encased in wooden palisades seems to have gone out the Window, imitating an Empire Earth II scenario of infinite resources which proved to be a total fail. We can only hope 0 A.D. Does not follow in the foot steps of failure and the team members reconcile with this argument and either rectify this, or implement a system which balances this. For now, this strategy cannot justify the continuation of infinite farming, but only to the perils of the players struggling to ward off a fantasy of a pressing enemy appearing from absolutely nowhere. With that said, I shall discuss a viable strategy. First off the enemy needs a market in order to benefit from infinite farming in order to exchange food for the other three essentials. Not withstanding the fact, that early on the enemy starts exchanging resources so early in the game it defeats this object entirely, but we approach from a surgical preemptive standpoint, we become aware the enemies options and therefore we can stop him in his tracks. The Method? Farms cost wood Markets cost wood So does every building! Keep demolishing these structures will render a depletion of wood stocks, that is assuming your scouts and cavalry monitor the enemies wood supply chains wherever they might be. How to eliminate these structures? A group of suicide divisions of at least 20 men to attack ONLY these structures will result in a slow trickle of depletion. Conclusion? We can how silly and stupid this infinite farming is, but there ways to counter this. Let's hope something gets done about it. Ave

The war dogs were used by Egyptians and later by Rome in the Germanic regions, serving as patrol units. The only Celts I'm aware of that used and trained dogs were the Britons. Iceni. War dogs were not "shock troops" they were classified as skirmishes to disgruntle and dishearten enemy soldiers. Shock units are more heavy cavalry which thumps enemy lines hard causing mayhem and dismay. This also applies to heavy infantry. And if you look at my Roman post in the mods section, I have mentioned this

I would see if iptables has the ports blocked, as we would have no idea of what is configured on your box. Once you are sure they are open on OS side, google a manuel for you router model, and learn if it's firmware has an integrated firewall and an option to rout and forward ports

First of all, I'll say in my opinion I think England and Scotland and to some extent northern Ireland have contained or preserved the Celtic heritage far more than any country in this era. The British pagan ceremonies, and the legend of king Arthur, which is Christian yes, but Merlin and the "mystical" side features the Celtic essence which makes it a mixture. Now back to the topic, one of the things we both agree on here, is vast numbers of Celtic population still left. But let me elaborate. By the time the Roman occupation where backtracking - I personally don't believe Rome fell, I believe it was carefully planned to shape shift from a dominant political war machine into a war machine of faith, a Christian disguise which would later become to be known as Byzantium, and Roman Catholicism, in order to adapt to cultural invasions with A: the probable cause to adapt, or B: that there really was a significant internal degeneration based on the scandalous nature in which the Roman elite evolved, drunk from the omnipotence indulging in luxurious baths of decadence, one can only imagine the vast sums of millions of sestercies flowing like a river of milk and honey down that dark infinite drain of the bowels of corruption would of in all likeness brought about the death of the Empire. That it was civil cannibalism and indeed not a conspiracy. But its because its staring us in the face with facts -- the council of Nicaea -- that it was Constantine who was the emperor with foresight, layed the marble road for another thousand years for Rome to tread in a new guise. This is blatantly off the subject, but to better illustrate the turn of events, one needs to assimilate the procedure of deterioration to better understand general movement across the borders. In these times when the Romans were fleeting Gaul, it became a completely different age... It became one where perspective and mental perception of everything, mysteriously shifted into something mirroring a Tolkien theme of total chaos and mayhem of civilization. Almost to the point that "the orcs" were at the gates and Rome (helmdeep) was fending for its sovereign right. It was when empires micronized into fragments of principalities and kingdoms where empires became the thing of the past. The concept shattered, civilization and true culture dismantled, disfigured and burnt to cinders in a pile of barbaric ashes. It therefore signifies the dawn of the dark ages, that coming of these illiterates was certainly known to the Romans that's why a faith of Christianity was fabricated in order to exploit the superstitious condition of the illiterate. And this has crossed the dark path of controversy open to debate on a new thread which is titled as such. But a braking down of the oligarchy, invited every Tom @#$% and Harry to be a king, soon the fashion of Medieval times took on the feudal Japanese fashion -- cluster nest of warlords, where there wasn't a single point of government to dictate how thing unravel, but a continuous outbreak of minor pockets of conflict everywhere, which states that the original population of Celts got absorbed in pockets of kingdoms as the stock of peasents to provide the essential "FFs" (e.g. Food & Fodder) the driving force, the catalyst which runs empires, kingdoms alike. The sad fate of the Celts in the end, they became resources.... And the Vikings who settled in Normandy were nothing more than a tiny kingdoms that was set up, which absorbed thousands of Celts and later established the kingdom of Normandy

Apology for the brash sentiment. All I'm saying is, its more fun if we as the play do the spying rather than an AOE conventional automated revealer... Outdated. Besides, what's wrong with the emissary concept which is also a manual task? It might not come about in the main game, but I'm seriously planning this for a mod

For me I think its a little plain. Your colour choice is spot on, but I would give it more definition