LienRag

Well, the part about the cost of "town centers" may be right. Maybe fragile town centers with the same food&wood cost but only 100 Stone cost could be an idea ? With less area generated, like Kleroukies. The part about building granaries, ... in neutral territory is maybe not stupid, but contradicts the fundamentals options of 0ad. If the guy wants to play AoE in 0ad, let him build a AoE mod for 0ad... That doesn't mean that no solution to allow gathering in neutral territory should ever be created (Maurya elephants are interesting for that an not really overpowered since they are slow and vulnerable), just that they should have real constraints and impose a committed strategy, so that they would not become the default way of doing things. Building defenses in neutral territory is again a bad way of addressing the problem (especially since Athenians and Romans already can do that, so why remove their specificity ?). But it's true that it's very frustrating to have the perfect defensive position on the map and not being able to use it because it's a few inches too far from your area of control... Maybe things more varied than outposts could be added to the game ? Like a tower that cost a lot more but has its own root control area ? So it's possible to have a couple where they'll be really useful, but still not viable to spam them on the map. Not sure about the 4th point. Office decapitation as he writes is an important strategy, but maybe it should be a little less "all or nothing" ? No idea how to do it though. Maybe keep the ability to build inside the area even when the root is gone ?

Why not ? Needs a bell like on the CivCenter for citizens to come in, that's all (a different bell, of course).

Yeah, I think that I've read your post long ago and that influenced my proposal here (sorry I didn't quote you, I knew it was not an entirely original idea but didn't remember who wrote it initially). Note that what I wrote is a bit different from your idea : basically it keeps only the "first tier" that would be balanced with each other, the other civs would not have to be necessarily balanced between themselves. So it's more splitting the problem in two, one of balance for the first tier (much easier to fix since there would be 3-5 civilizations in that group) where it is agreed that uniqueness, while good, takes second position towards balance; and the second of uniqueness where it's easier to be creative when relieved of the necessity to keep balance with everyone (not to say that these civs would need to be unbalanced, but balance can take second position). Also, it's more a provisional situation, as when the game reaches 1.0 it can be possible to be more thorough both about balance and unicity. But there's no point in trying to do the very difficult task of keeping 13 or more civilizations both unique and balanced multiple times as each new release shatters the very-hard-to-reach equilibrium.

("this option" being Civ unicity) The real question is "when". It's probably possible to balance very different civilizations once the game is ready for a somehow freeze of new features, it's an entirely different thing to keep them balanced when they occur frequent changes as the game evolves. One compromise would be (while waiting for the perfected game) to have a few civs balanced for competitive multiplayer, even if they're not that unique, and have very differently playable civs for the rest of the game, even if they're not that balanced (of course if unbalanced, they shouldn't be more powerful than the first batch).

Magic SysRq is described above. I haven't tried it. I guess a Magic Key would be one that prevents any error in the terminal ? Would be nice to have... Note than none of your solutions worked on my two crashes, as described on my first and last post.

I tried to do that (on KenWood) but it didn't work... How should it be done ? Should I left drag first then press 0 ? Press 0 first then left drag ? Keep 0 pressed then left drag (not possible on a laptop without a numeric pad) ?

I had a new occurrence of the same problem, this time testing the Terra Magna mod (still on KenWood). Also, this time (since I had less things running in the background) the RAM was way less used (around 4 Gb on a total of 16 Gb). I tried the "ps -ef| grep /usr/games" command but it brought me nothing save the grep process itself. pstree didn't show anything remotely looking like 0ad nor pyrogenesis. I had not configured the different workspaces nor the Magic SysRq. Since I didn't have unsaved work on the other windows this time, I just restarted the game from the F1 console.

Would they be "p2 champions" (i.e., weaker than p3 champions that we have now) or be the p3 champions transferred to p2 ?

Zeugma ? Zen ? (if there are less flame wars about what is OP and not in this alpha) Zis-game-is-ze-best ? (yes, I'm French) Zorglub ? Zebigboss (briton leader) ? Zeitgeist ? Zimbabwé ? (not sure that the historical kingdom fits in the time period, though) Zun Tsu ? Zargos ? Z world war ? Zombie ? the game is still not dead... Zorrino ? the cute and faithful little game... Zowie ? Z for Zendetta ?

Scroll bar would be a mess to find units not appearing on it by default. Expandable view as was suggested (which may produce a scroll bar, as long as it's not on default) is a way better idea if it's technically possible.

TorBrowser by design doesn't save any tab, alas... I did ask on the Debian forum but did get only partial answers that didn't solve the problem.

That should be a togglable stance...

On a unrelated topic to my earlier messages, it would be nice if announcement pages for a release linked to installation instructions for this precise release and not only to generic instructions for installation of 0ad which do not lead to installing the aforementioned release... apt install 0ad is a very fine way of installing 0ad, but it installs a23.

TorBrowser, mostly. And yes, the termination of 0ad is certainly a possibility, but then why is the 0ad screen still there ? And how to get out of this mess without shutting down the computer ?

Well, I did try to give a try to a25, but to no avail...

I like that ! Both realistic(-ish, at least enough to be intuitive) and gives them a double-edged difference with other units. Also allow heavy infantry some leeway while facing archers.

How would you allow cavalcade ? Afaik some of the period Cavalry Archers (not the ones in the vanilla civilizations though) used it as a regular tactic.

... (double post deleted)

But in Greek and early Roman civilizations at least (less sure about the others, though I'm quite convinced that's also true for Gauls and the like) these male citizens would go to war as soldiers when needed. It's afaik a core feature of these societies, so removing the way that 0ad pictures them accurately doesn't make any sense. If that's not true for Egyptians (it's not real historical knowledge, but I'm under the impression that the peasant class in Egyptian society wasn't composed of citizen-soldiers, but you really better check rather that believe me at face value) then by all means yes, go for including male villagers in their civilization ! Ditto of course for any civilization that would have free villagers unable/unexpected to fight in wars.

Well, a lot of things... Is there something in particular that I should look for ?

Well, a lot of things... Also a lot of thing with a | grep 0 at the end of it. And nothing (except the grep itself) with a | grep 0ad at the end of it.

Well, to me the idea that we can correct the misogyny of most of the depicted ancient societies is preposterous and bordering on delirium. That by making them appear less misogynous than they were we would be doing anything good is also imho a completely perverse way of thinking and certainly not "progressive" in any manner. What we can do (and that's what I'm advocating) is correct the misogyny of historical representations of these ancient societies. So imho it can be a good thing to highlight in-game any aspect of ancient society that actually empowered women of these societies, and to also highlight any ancient society that was less misogynistic than the others (so as to pinpoint that misogyny isn't "the natural order" nor "what people did at the time" but a political, social and cultural choice that some people/societies made and some others refused), in order to avoid reproducing usual prejudices that people may have about ancient cultures after a XIX° century of male historians projecting their chauvinistic and misogynistic prejudices on their study subject. This work to debunk historical misogynistic misinterpretations by providing historical accuracy in-game (as long as it keeps the game fun and strategic) is endangered imho by the introduction of "antisexist" historical inacurracies in the name of "making girl players happy", so I deeply object to any attempt to do so.

Yes, the flatpak tells me that it would need 3 Gb and finds only 500 Mb available, that's why the installation aborts. And I actually have more than 3 Gb of available free space.

Not if it's made clear that playing a different Civilization means learning the game anew (and if the tutorial is made to learn at least two civilizations with their differences and explicitly warns to check for the Civilization's specificity when playing a new one. Certainly an interesting idea but very unbalanced if it's used for something else than food (I mean, if it's buildable in neutral territory). That would be a huge differentiation factor if those storehouses for metal and stone were buildable in neutral territory (like KenWood's outposts) but that would need careful balancing. Also it would be very bad in games with scattered trees...