Nescio

The development version is actually playable and doing a svn up (or git pull) is often sufficient: the game only needs to be rebuilt if C++ files are changed, which are only a minority of the commits. There are already autobuilds for Windows users. I don't know how difficult it would be to set up autobuilds for macOS too. For Linux (excluding Android), compiling the game the first time is rather time-consuming, though not too difficult: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/BuildInstructions is quite clear. (It's a bit unfortunate `--with-system-mozjs` doesn't work, that would save a lot of space and time.) Afterwards rebuilding usually takes a few minutes; occassions where you have to do a clean and compile from nothing are actually quite rare. I guess it's similar on BSD. Doing weekly (e.g. every Saturday) unstable releases of the development version is possible in principle, provided someone (not a team member) takes responsibility for this and stays around in the long term. 0 A.D. should adopt a different version numbering then, instead of 0.0.25, go to 25.0.0 (start), 25.0.1 (after the first week), 25.0.2 (after the second week), etc., though that's a minor point. Having said that, making it easier for users to update the game does not mean they actually will: there is no way to force people to do a svn up or git pull. Moreover, as already pointed out before, the development version is much larger than the stable releases, which are stripped down: on my end (Fedora 33) the former is c. 35 GB, the latter only c. 2 GB. While not a problem for me, it is for many others around the world.

More frequent releases would certainly be nice, but doing a release is a lot more work than one might expect. The feature freeze was on the 21st of January (see https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/ReleaseProcessDraft ), the decision to release was made a few weeks earlier. Basically it takes a month to do a release. Even though 0 A.D. is called an alpha, the team cares about stability; fixing bugs tends to take more time than expected. And time spent on the release process is time not spent on other things. The real problem is the small number of active team members.

That sounds poor indeed, however, I suppose there is a good reason for this. (Perhaps the SpiderMonkey update?) Can't you update your macOS, though? https://www.apple.com/macos/how-to-upgrade/

True, I know and I'm not disputing that. From page 2 of that encyclopedia entry, though: The Meroitic language is only superficially known, although both of its scripts (explained below) were deciphered a hundred years ago by the British Egyptologist Francis Llewellyn Griffith. The reason for our poor knowledge of the language is the lack of bilingual texts and, until recently, the isolated position of Meroitic among the African languages. Since Griffith’s time, nearly all progress toward the translation of the texts was made through the painstaking procedures of the “philological method.” This approach takes the rare known elements of texts (e.g., Egyptian loanwords, divine and royal names, words understood through their iconographic context) and attempts, through guesswork, to derive the meaning of the neighboring elements. Using this method, Griffith was able to establish approximate translations of the standard funerary texts, which are very numerous and highly stereotyped (Griffith 1911). In contrast, the royal texts include narratives that naturally utilize a richer vocabulary and possess more varied syntactic structures. For this reason, only rare stereotyped passages, such as initial royal protocols and lists of enemies killed in battle and of captured women and livestock, can be even partially understood. Presently, no more than a hundred words can be translated with some certainty. Also see https://glottolog.org/resource/languoid/id/mero1237 While the case for Eastern Sudanic (or at least its Northern subgroup) is better, what you wrote and what I responded to was: I'm certainly not arguing Meroitic is a Cushitic or Afroasiatic language. I'm merely urging caution with stating as a fact a poorly understood language belongs to a poorly understood language family. It's even worse than that: while scientific racism is no longer acceptable, ordinary people have internalized racial concepts, and millions nowadays self-identify as “black” or “white”.

Please don't take things personal. People read and reply to your posts, which shows they're interested in your work and interact with you. Everyone has a different background and way of expressing themselves; people here are all volunteers with limited time; and most of us aren't team members (the team is actually quite small, and currently very busy with getting the next stable (A24) released), but contributions from others are certainly welcome. Criticisms are part of the process to get things improved. The fact people look at your proposals and give feedback indicates you're appreciated. Proposals are rarely embraced immediately, therefore it's advisable to: be patient; try to explain it differently; improve it further and address concerns raised by others. That said, if you want to see something included, you should upload (and maintain) patches to https://code.wildfiregames.com/ In a forum post it's very hard to keep track of everything, go into detail, or review changes.

Furthermore, we might want to replace Tagalog with Filipino (the standardized national variety); cf. Indonesian vs Malay. As you can see, none of the five entries there is about the kingdom of Kush. Is this true? I'm certainly no expert, however, I vaguely recall: Meroitic is too poorly understood to be properly classified (too few bilingual texts); Nilo-Saharan is a proposed language family; Eastern Sudanic is undemonstrated. For comparison, the Altaic language family (lumping Turkic, Mongolic, Tungusic, Koreanic, and Japonic languages together) is no longer accepted either. By the way, it would be nice if you could improve https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/SpecificNames#Meroitic Basically historical Kush → Biblical Cush (grandson of Noah) → unrelated Cushitic languages.

As for localization, a locale is more than just the language; e.g. fr_FR implies A4 paper and the euro, while fr_CA implies the letter size and Canadian dollar. In 0 A.D. we're not interested in paper sizes or currencies, only in the written language, hence why we should simply use fr (and ta instead of ta_IN). Thank you! This is indeed inconsistent and should be corrected. It's probably the result of confusing Kushites (the people from the ancient kingdom of Kush) with Cushitic (the branch of the Afroasiatic language family, of which Oromo and Somali are the most spoken languages nowadays). In 0 A.D. we're only interested in the former, thus the proper Spanish form is kushitas. Unfortunately some of the translations containing cusitas have been reviewed, which means they can't be changed by most translators, so someone with more priviliges (@av93, @Gallaecio?) should fix this (click on “All resources” and use a “text:kushite” filter).

Dear translators, there is only a day and a half left to get these to 100%: (The cut-off is reportedly at 90%.)

As far as I can see no :/ https://docs.transifex.com/projects/adding-and-removing-project-languages#changing-a-target-language

@Gallaecio, @GunChleoc, @Itms, @Stan`, is it possible to replace the current “Tamil (India) (ta_IN)” localization with just “Tamil (ta)”, keeping the currently translated strings? Tamil is an official language of Sri Lanka and Singapore as well, there is no point in having the _IN version. Also, I'm still in favour of deleting: It's a bit annoying people keep requesting duplicates of existing languages:

c. 500 BC – 1 BC. Hello and welcome to the forums! In 0 A.D.'s timeframe there were no interactions between Eurasia and the Americas or Oceania, therefore such civilizations won't be included into the default distribution. However, they (and others) can be added via mods. Terra Magna adds a few civilizations from other parts of the world, Millennium A.D. some from the AD 500–1000 timeframe, and Hyrule Conquest dozens from the Legend of Zelda. 0 A.D. is free and open-source software and designed to be easily modifiable. While quality, consistency, and historical accuracy matter for the public version (base game), there are no limitations on what is acceptable for mods; you can do whatever you like, and are more than welcome to create fantasy things.

Or Athenians getting +10% metal gather rate per phase advance (i.e. +21% in total in city phase). Or Mauryas and Persians having +10% population cap. No penalties attached either. In A24 siege engines can only be constructed in arsenals. Fortresses can no longer train troops, army camps only advanced infantry.

Not just Roman rams, also those of the Persians (and in A24, the Kushites too). Roman artillery is also more powerful (in A24 only the stone-thrower). While this may seem “a bit imbalanced”, some other factions have civilization bonuses too, e.g. Briton and Gaul structures are built more quickly and Ptolemaic structures cost less wood; those are more significant, since they already make a difference at game start, unlike siege engines inflicting more damage.

To me it seems you're confusing a position with a point, which are two different things. Please correct me if I'm mistaken, it's been a while since I last dabbled in mathematics. Repeating the question won't give you the answer. 0 A.D. has a history of nearly two decades, people who worked on it in the past are no longer active now. If you don't understand a piece of code and the rest of the file doesn't make it any clearer, then you should use svn blame or go through the svn revision history to figure out when it was introduced, and read the discussions at the relevant differentials or trac tickets, if any. It might give you information you need.

Unfortunately I can't really help you here, I'm not a programmer and I don't understand C++ source code, nor do I get the problem (isn't a position a vector, mathematically?). Anyway, the lines you're asking about were introduced by commit 21144, the associated patch (with discussion) is https://code.wildfiregames.com/D1041

What you could do is look up the file ( https://trac.wildfiregames.com/browser/ps/trunk/source/simulation2/components/CCmpFootprint.cpp ) and use the svn blame and revision log history. No guarantees, but you might find something (or someone) that could help you further.

Thank you for the feedback! Currently A24 is under a feature freeze and a string freeze. This means only bug fixes and very simple changes (e.g. tweaking a cost) can go in, if it's deemed important enough. Everything else will have to wait until after the release. Here's a patch for you: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3515 And for this too: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D3516 A lighthouse is much better: it has a lot more health and resistance, is not affected by territory decay, does not have to be garrisoned, and reveals an area 4× as large as a garrisoned outpost (or 400× that of an ungarrisoned outpost). This was discussed at https://code.wildfiregames.com/D2533

More of the same:

Just start with “Use British spelling.” or something; I'll expand later.

A good question! They're basically equivalents, but en-GB is more common, and also used by 0 A.D.'s l10n .po files.

@MrAdam, thank you for the confirmation! By the way, 0 A.D. already had a https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/EnglishStyleGuide for user-facing strings in the public repository, but now translators can also request having a specific page for their language at https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Localization#AdditionalInstructionsforLanguageTeams @Stan`, could you add a page for British English? Perhaps a “Translators” subforum should be added under “Game Development & Technical Discussion”. A quick forum search revealed a number of forum threads: There are many more, I only checked the first pages of search results. (And I didn't even search for “internationalization”, “localization”, or “translation” .)

Another image to highlight the difference in attack range calculations in A23 and A24: range_comparison_3.svg black: a structure with an obstruction size of 40×40 (e.g. rome civic centre) red: attack range of 60 calculated from the footprint centre (A23 and earlier) green: attack range of 60 calculated from the obstruction edge (not implemented) blue: attack range of 60 calculated from the circle around the obstruction (A24) As you can see structures with the same attack range can now shoot much farther than they used to, and as a consequence, units can no longer outrange structures with the same attack range.

A related thread: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/27008-poll-armour-tooltip-format/

Out of curiosity, why not Cambyses II or Artaxerxes I? And why are Cyrus and Darius called “the Great” but Xerxes “King of Persia”? Also, Cyrus ought to be Cyrus II, to distinguish him from his grandfather. Anyway, it's your mod, do whatever you like.

e.g. rome/siege_wall_gate.xml has: <Obstruction> <Obstructions> <Right width="11.5" depth="5" x="12.25" z="0"/> <Left width="11.5" depth="5" x="-12.25" z="0"/> <Door width="13" depth="5" x="0" z="0"/> </Obstructions> </Obstruction>