Nescio

This is something I really want to see removed too. (It's hardcoded somewhere in the map scripts.) Iberians certainly didn't build better walls or more frequently than anyone else historically. Sure, civilizations are rather similar to each other and should become more differentiated, however, differentiation for the sake of differentiation and at the expense of realism, no thanks. Let them start with a monument instead, that should already give them a defensive advantage (and also help the AI).

19923 (2017-07-29) was the start of A23 development and 21947 (2018-12-26) was the start of A24 development. You're starting A24 with 21821 (2018-05-16), which is basically shifting the goalposts by seven months, distorting the numbers. A23b was very much part of the release process of A23 and the game remained under a feature freeze; no work was done on A24 during this time. Likewise, A24b is part of A24, not the start of A25. If I recall correctly, the last commit for A24 was on the 18th, the release was bundled on the 19th, and the release announcement was posted on the 20th; one or two things slipped through, which were quickly corrected with the rerelease of A24b on the 21st. Nothing was done in the next few days, to be able to do another rerelease if necessary, and the development of A25 started yesterday, with 24939 (2021-02-27). See also: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Alpha23 https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Alpha24 https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Alpha25

Yes, coinage did exist in 0 A.D.'s timeframe, however, their value depended on their purity and weight. That's also why I decided to name the resource “silver” in my 0abc mod, not “coins” or “money”. And yes, the ancient world certainly wasn't fully monetized: rent was typically a share of the harvest and import duties could be a percentage of the goods.

The problem of the current configuration is that there is insufficient space for displaying high values (try e.g. 1234 / 56789), which is possible with the “unlimited” population cap setting, hence why I'm contemplating putting population and population limit on separate lines, for which there is plenty of space.

Given that I was the only one who suggested a number, it's hardly surprising I won. This is wrong. You should take the revision that bumps the version number as the start of a new alpha and the release announcement as the end of the previous alpha. Moreover, as I already pointed out over a year ago, your table is misleading, since you're including A23b under A24. If you do it properly, you get: Xšayāršā: 2991 commits in 787 days (2018-12-26 to 2021-02-20) → 3.801 commits per day Ken Wood: 2024 commits in 512 days (2017-07-29 to 2018-12-23) → 3.953 commits per day Venustas: 1007 commits in 259 days (2016-11-10 to 2017-07-27) → 3.888 commits per day See https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Changelogs PS How's your fork?

Another thing, which of the following do you prefer? As can be seen in the screenshot I posted earlier, there isn't much space there either. I would have to sacrifice one of the selection panels to be able to squeeze a new resource panel in there. Currently I'm contemplating doubling the height of the top panel, allowing to have one row for resources and the build label and another row for buttons and dropdowns, as well as game time, group selection icons, and idle gatherer, idle builder, idle soldier, and idle unit icons. To do: Figure out how to add new idle [] icons. Figure out how to arrange group selection icons horizontally instead of vertically. Figure out how to add up all resource trickles and display the per second value below the total resource counts.

@Itms, when the translations from https://www.transifex.com/wildfire-games/0ad/ were last pulled for A24 (about two weeks ago), Korean was already at 100% but Chinese was below 90%, if I recall correctly. Right now Chinese is at 99.4%, a significant improvement. Since these translations are shipped separately, perhaps you could update the Chinese mod one more time?

Hello and welcome to the forums, @Alar1k, and thank you for drawing attention to this! As for the question raised in the thread title, the long and short of it is that nobody has bothered removing it. As for why the embassy limit is there in the first place, I don't know, though I guess it might have been to make them more “unique”. As for whether it should stay, that's open for discussion. Entity limits certainly do make sense for aura entities (heroes, wonders, theatres, monuments, etc.). However, I don't think they're really necessary for structures that merely produce units; barracks and stables don't have entity limits either, nor do the athen gymnasium, spart syssition, or cart super dock. I'm fine with removing the entity limit of embassies and mercenary camps; or perhaps replace it with a minimum distance, like the rome army camp has (and also centres, fortresses, towers). Furthermore, I think the fortress and tower entity limits could be removed too; their minimum distances and costs effectively limit their numbers already. The purpose of population is to limit the number of entities that move around. The more entities there are in a game, the more things have to be drawn, meaning more to render; and the more things that move, the more things that change, hence more draw calls and hence more lag. Cossacks had an engine that could comfortably handle tens of thousands of units and didn't need nor have a population limitation. In A24 mercenaries have 30% less training time than their citizen counterparts. Basically it's 7 mercenaries or 5 citizens or 3 champions. That said, mercenaries could certainly be further differentiated. [EDIT] I'm also in favour of replacing the cart embassies with mercenary camps (cf. kush) and of introducing mercenary camps for the Greeks. In the long run having certain maps using certain mercenary camps would be great. (Didn't @wowgetoffyourcellphone start experimenting with that already?)

All archers have a reload time of 1 s in A24. The proposal to give all heroes the same health ( https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2682 ) was abandoned; instead ( https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3250 ), healer and infantry heroes have 1000 health, cavalry heroes 1200, elephant heroes 1500 in A24. That's possible and that was actually done in the past. If I recall correctly, @Grugnas and @Hannibal_Barca both wrote balance mods for A22 and @borg-, @Feldfeld, and @ValihrAnt each did for A23; there might be a few others too. Mods have advantages (can be quickly changed, easy to use, suitable for playtesting) but also their limitations (unpredictable lifespan; opaque decision-making process; tempting to include unrelated changes); basically they stand or fall with their author and mostly reflect the vision of a single person. What changed during the development of A24 is that people who used to write their own mods decided to become more involved and participated in proposing and reviewing patches on Phabricator. Yes, a lot has changed in A24, and sure, not every single change may have been an improvement. Nevertheless, the fact there is change is in itself already progress. A24 isn't perfect, it's very much a work in progress, and right now people will need time to get used to the new version. However, I sincerely believe A24 as a whole will be considered to be a better product than A23 by the vast majority of players in a month or two.

So I just did a bit of testing too: 20 dogs vs 20 cavalry javelineers → 13 surviving cavalry 20 dogs vs 20 cavalry swordsmen → 18 surviving cavalry 20 dogs vs 10 cavalry javelineers + 10 cavalry swordsmen → 10+4 surviving cavalry 20 dogs vs 20 infantry javelineers → 9 surviving dogs 20 dogs vs 20 infantry swordsmen → 8 surviving infantry 20 dogs vs 10 infantry javelineers + 10 infantry swordsmen → 10+0 surviving infantry Which again shows (i) swordsmen are most effective and (ii) infantry javelineers die quickly. Given that dogs and animals can't attack structures and most players tend to have civic centres and towers which can be garrisoned and shoot arrows, I expect going for dogs might be not all that effective in practice.

The Nisean horses technology (city phase) is still available to pers and sele only. Yes, I agree; as I wrote in this thread only yesterday: I'm sorry your experience has been an unhappy one. We're all human in an imperfect world. Gameplay and balance are discussed in numerous threads on these forums, as well as in private conversations and via other channels. It's impossible for anyone to keep track of everything. Moreover, making changes is a slow process, it's not unusual for a patch to be committed (or abandoned) months or even years after it's proposed, which means that even if some comment was read and replied to in the past, it may have been forgotten by the time a final decision is made. Therefore it's really important to keep the discussion unified in a single place: the relevant patch on https://code.wildfiregames.com/ , because it's there the actual development happens and commits are made. In case you're referring to https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2507 : you left one comment there and disappeared. Others continued the conversation, on-and-off, the patch was revised six more times, and in the end several people agreed it should be given a try; it was left open for a couple more months and finally committed in December. If it turns out to have a horrible impact, then it can be reverted in A25, of course, though so far I haven't seen people complaining about palisades in A24.

For the record, a player could have up to 50 dogs in A23, in A24 only 20. Their movement speed is slightly lower and they can no longer promote, making them effectively weaker. Dogs might be useful in particular situations, I don't know, though generally investing the 100 food in two more female workers to gather wood or cavalry is better in the early game. Further changes could be made in A25, of course.

Basically, there is a reason for every change, otherwise it wouldn't have been committed. What conversations such as this show is the need for more people to frequently play-test the development version and give feedback before a new stable version is released. Feedback afterwards is certainly welcome too, however, keep in mind the next version is months away and will also include (many) other changes.

One of the reasons for that removal is to make player choices more important. Having technologies everyone would research anyway also increase other things for free is not particularly meaningful. In my opinion technologies should be simple, small, and straightforward, leaving it up to the player to decide what to prioritize. I'm not sure what you mean. Persians and Seleucids still have a city-phase Nisean Horses technology, which works on top of the generic cavalry health technology that's available to all civilizations (it was added as a partial compensation for the removal of health from the city phase). Siege engines were removed from them at the explicit request of someone who pointed out they were only slightly more expensive than arsenals but much more effective. Perhaps rams only could be readded to the army camp, I don't know how that will affect balance, it needs testing, as do other things. They still have +10% metal gather rate per phase advance (i.e. +21% in city phase), the possibility to train troops in triremes, and the quite interesting Long Walls technology.

As for unit production, some training times have been tweaked, yes, but not everything is slower; e.g. citizen cavalry went from 15 s to 16 s, but champion cavalry from 30 s to 27 s, reducing the gap between citizens and champions a bit, to make champions a more viable option. As for unit movement, cavalry has been slowed down a bit, but not everything moves slower; the base speed remains the same (9), traders and female workers are unchanged, rams are a bit slower (8.1→7.2), but infantry spearmen (8.1→9) and pikemen (7.2→8.1) are a bit faster. Nevertheless, the game certainly does feel slower. I suspect it's primarily because unit rotation rates have been changed to discourage “dancing”; see D2837 for more details; D3274 softened it a bit. Each civic centre already gives 20 population. Sure, one could give e.g. a further +5. Or just give Britons an extra house at game start. Or merge the farmstead and house for them. Or something else .

You don't have to play A24: you can continue to play A23, if you like, or an even earlier version . Yes. Civilizations were already very similar in A23 and earlier releases and have become even more similar in A24. This is unfortunate, I don't like it much either. The reason it happened is because it's more important to get the basics right and having a balanced core gameplay, from which to further differentiation later.

All three are fine, I have no preference here; do you? The former might have been chosen because 0 A.D.'s corral is more than just an enclosure, it also has a little building, though I'm guessing here. The latter should be pluralized: σκόλοψ (singular) means ‘pale, stake, anything pointy’, while σκόλοπες (plural) means ‘palisade’. The word χάραξ can mean ‘pointed stake, pale’ (like Latin vallus), but also ‘entrenched army camp’ (like Latin vallum); there is also χαράκωμα ‘palisaded enclosure’. As for why it's currently called ‘palisade’ for all civs, that's because currently all civs share the same file. I've written a patch to address that: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3594 (and opted for σκόλοπες and vallus). Currently all Greek civilizations use the same Greek and νᾱός is the most common form; however, other forms are attested, including Ionic νηός, Attic νεώς, Aeolic ναῦος, and Spartan ναϝός. Do you actually know any Phoenician, other than the alphabet (abjad)?

A quick look at this post showed there were 92 gameplay-tweaking commits in 2020 and 79 in 2021. But yeah, two-and-a-half years of development doesn't mean two-and-a-half years of extensive testing.

You can do that by inserting: gui.scale = "2" into your local `user.cfg` file. (See https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/GameDataPaths for where to find it.)

That was D3097. I've now updated the previous post. I'm not sure what you mean.

Classical (Attic) Greek won't be of help in this case, since all words starting with an upsilon are actually aspirated (i.e. start with hy-). It's alien to Latin too. Nor do I expect much from Gaulish, since the few words that survived were written in Greek or Latin alphabets. Therefore we should look east: the y is used for transcribing many languages. I'm suggesting Yaunā, the Old Persian word for Ionians, Macedonians, and Greeks, which seems to me a nice follow-up to Xšayāršā (Xerxes). If, however, the Han make it into the next release (), then we can also use Chinese, giving more options to choose from.

You should have a look at the patches that broke your maps, they have sed scripts to fix things: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1009 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1010 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2234 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2254 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2774 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3012 https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3097 Furthermore, you need to replace {civ}_* with {civ}/* (for structures and units). https://code.wildfiregames.com/P225 was used for that, though that script does more than you need, so it's probably better to write a sed script for that (there are only 13 civs). [EDIT] Here you go: [EDIT] There are probably some other things I forgot.

Somehow this mod doesn't show up in the in-game mod download in A24. While a lot has changed since A23 and the new release breaks most mods, this one still works fine, as it should: font rendering was last changed in 7595. (And if it doesn't work, clear your cache, then it will.) So could you have a look and make it show up?

Thank you for the feedback. Getting the balance right is tricky and we certainly do not claim everything is perfect; 0 A.D. is very much a work in progress. Nevertheless, players such as @badosu, @borg-, @Feldfeld, and @ValihrAnt participated during the development and gave feedback, therefore we hope A24 is overall better than any previous release. As for war elephants, their crush damage has actually been reduced, from 150 to 120. As for slingers, they had a reload time of 1 s in A23, in A24 it's increased to 1.25 s. As for archers, their range has been reduced from 72+4+4 to 60. Moreover, ranged troops promote more slowly and advanced, elite, and champion ranged troops are easier to kill. That said, there will be further changes in the next release (A25) and more feedback is certainly welcome!

Ideally, yes. Furthermore, portraits (of units, structures, resources, technologies) ought to have fully transparent backgrounds, to improve flexibility and consistency; opaque background colours could be placed underneath with a bit of code. I do : having 0 A.D. occupy one-half of the screen allows me to use a text editor or web browser on the other half; or two instances of 0 A.D. next to each other. Besides, designing for a width of 960 pixels also means it will work on 1024×768 (the mimimum supported resolution) and 1280×720, and it allows for easy scaling: 960×2=1920; 960×3=2880; 960×4=3840.