Undo

I'm no historian or writer, but I'd be happy to give my contribution. On a related note, where should we report any typos we find?

License issues aside, wouldn't it be better for the game's credibility and professionalism to have 100% original texts? Going through the game strings, I noticed that a lot of lines are just copied from Wikipedia or from other sites. That already looks sloppy per se (IMHO), but sometimes the copied text doesn't even make sense, when it's completely stripped of its context. For instance, string 431: "Brennus is the name which the Roman historians give to the famous leader of the Gauls who took Rome in the time of Camillus. According to Geoffrey, the brothers invaded Gaul and sacked Rome in 390 B.C., 'proving' that Britons had conquered Rome, the greatest civilization in the world, long before Rome conquered the Britons." Who are these 'brothers'? Is Geoffrey so well-known he needs no introduction? This line appears to be taken from this article (http://www.vortigernstudies.org.uk/artgue/guestsheila3.htm) and just pasted in the game text without any patching whatsoever. Not to mention the rest of the string is hard to read and confusing (and in the end, it doesn't really explain the difference between mythical Brennius and historical Brennus). Actually, many historical description texts are confusing and should probably be rewritten (the one about Kunobelinos comes to mind). Just expressing my feelings on the subject

Thank you Another quick question: who assigns reviewers? Is it the coordinator who picks translators to be reviewers?

I've just joined the Portuguese translating team on Transifex. Could someone explain me a little better how does the coordination work? For example, if I find a mistake, am I able to simply edit what others have already translated? Or is every modification subject to discussion? What happens when two people disagree on the best translation? Thanks for your help!

Horrible graphics, terrible format. The true AoE series is dead :'(

Playing Renaissance music, though.

I second this.

Portugal will not be playable in that game, so it will suck (/jk... more or less ).

Cortés and his gang of Spanish conquistadores?

Because it combines RTW's gameplay with historical accuracy?

Would Germans be divided in Visigoths/Ostrogoths/whatever, just like Celts are divided in Gauls and Britons?

I know that was the plan, but it would seem you'd like to see that plan changed... Why making a factions-patch when you already know you want more than 6 factions? Don't take me the wrong way, I'm not suggesting you should change your plans or something, I'm just curious about what your plans are.

But why do you relegate those civs to "a patch"? Why can't you include them all together in the first release?

I thought it was 3 workdays a month.

I'm yet to understand what exactly is being discussed here... Is it a game from scratch, like 0AD? What's its name? What type of game it is?

Yes, I had already talked about this delicate issue with Mythos before. As you pointed out, it is difficult to achieve such a level of historical accuracy in a game. Plus, in comparison with the knowledge there is about Carthaginians, Celts, and etcaetera, very little is known about the Iberian cultures and tribes. Separating them even more would be almost impossible in this context.

Sassanids had the biggest empire in 0AD part II timespan, so I'm counting on their appearance.

Would the Germanic subfactions include all the main barbaric forces? By "main barbaric forces", I mean - Sueves - Franks - Angles - Saxons - Burgundians - Visigoths - Ostrogoths About the Huns, I seem to remember having read somewhere that there is confusion between East European Huns and Asian Huns, being the latter nomadic and the former not. Even if EEHuns were nomadic, they eventually settled somewhere in Hungary, so mountable and dismountable buildings are probably a better option (rather than mobile buildings). Or, alternatively, they could have mobile buildings that could be dismounted somewhere whenever the player wished, but once dismounted could no longer be mounted.

I can draw.

You think? So what is your opinion about that drawing included in the instructions booklet of AoE3 that showed five eras, where the first referred to AoE1, the second to AoE2, the third to AoE3, and then it had a fourth with a modern soldier and a fifth with a robot?

Hm... I think that is not quite correct. If I recall correctly, a forum was a sort of big square which could function as a marketplace - but it wasn't a "market". Am I wrong?

I like it.

It has passed one year... I hope all the information posted in this thread - and also the documents I've sent to you via messenger - is being useful!

Hey, a fellow-countryman!

Nuno Raimundo, 18