LienRag

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...

The more I think of it, the more I believe that the upkeep in metal could be only when they fight and/or are wounded; the rest of the time an upkeep in food may be sufficient. Also, instead of having to hire all of them at once, a limit to how many mercenaries one can hire on promised pay could be set. As long as this limit has not been reached, it's possible to hire new ones before having settled the debt. This limit could rise with some techs and also with the loot acquired (mercenaries able to loot are happy mercenaries)... Needs very careful balancing, but could be really fun to play.

Since as of now I only played a23, I may not be the best to talk on this subject. I only want to have this uniqueness (that, as you say, exists in KenWood) preserved, as it is indeed fun to play. I want to test a25 but if the civs are copypasta of each other, I'm a bit wary that the improvements to the game come at a cost too high for my taste.

Also the possibility to exclude some Civilizations from some biomes. Ptolemy and Maurya are clearly benefiting enormously from Savanna Biome, so if that's fine to the players allow them, but if the players want a more balanced game, exclude these Civs from the ones available on this game.

I started one of my first games of 0ad KenWood (I tried the game a bit in 2010 and found it unplayable) with Maurya, I think by random start Civ. So I agree that the starting Elephant is a great advantage that balance-wise should be removed, but if I had not the starting elephant as a beginner I would never have understood what their use was. And I believe that many beginners would also have trouble figuring it out, as it's not intuitive at all. Maybe making the Elephant have a maximum carrying capacity (like 500) and needing to drop it to a dropsite would be good ? But it also would be quite difficult to figure out for beginners, and also is a double-edged sword : you get more worker efficiency, but also you don't get the resources when you drop them at the elephant, only when the elephant drops them at the dropsite.

Fine by me, but the whole thread comes from the fact that these two objectives apparently contradict each other. And the important point for the game experience is that Civs are unique, so when balance goes against uniqueness the point that makes the Civ unique should stay and balance should be sought by other mechanisms (like sets).

I don't think so, where would the typo be ? I wanted to write Go and Mo but these are French units, so I guess their equivalent in English are Gb and Mb (gigabytes and megabytes) ?

Anything that has actual historical accuracy should be added, yes. About archers, from what I read there is a serious misconception on what musculature is necessary to use a military bow of the period ; Katniss Evergreen would never be able to wield one with the muscle mass that she shows in the movie. So barred historical precedents of female archers, no, popular culture should not be the basis for including them in the game.

Coming from KenWood, I don't see the problem with some civilizations not needing to mine stone if they're not going for defences ? To me it just brings more variation in gameplay, which is a good thing... Of course, the economic advantage they get from that should not be overwhelming over the disadvantage of having less defence... The only problem I could see is with Maurya whose walls are made of wood. They (and probably only they) should have some techs that need stone (like techs available only at castles or elephant stables), or not having access to champions if they don't have a castle.

Do they fight for 1 full minute ? Anyway I'm not the balancer-in-chief, the number I gave was just an indication, it certainly can be changed.

I've read that fishes on 0.25 are way more easy to spot now, that's a good thing. Are fishing boats now also able to get to a new fishing point when the one they were on is depleted ? There's a lot of pointless micro-management there that could be removed (or be optional ; there could be a stance "pick your fishery" or "ask for instructions" if having fishing boat pick their own fishery exposes them to enemy action).

Night and day can be strategically fun (if their duration is long enough to achieve something during them) but totally incompatible with the game timescale ?

To make treasures/relics/whatever more prone to generating interactions, they need to be made way more visible on the strategic map... Right now (I play KenWood since I'm on Debian Stable) the only thing easily seen on the strategic map is animals (bright pink) and trees (green), and secondarily stone (grey) and thirdly metal (yellow, but not bright enough to be easily distinguished on the map, depending on what surrounds it). Even berries are quite difficult to spot (slightly different green) ! There at least should be a map mode that shows only resources, and probably a way to toggle which resources to show (so it could be possible to show only berries, or only metal, or only treasures, or only relics,...) making very easy to spot whatever the player is interested in. And relics are not visible outside the vision range of a unit, which means that if you send cavalry to scout the map, you need to micromanage them in permanence (checking if there is a relic in their area of vision). I never played multiplayer (I'm too old to play on faster than "slow" and I don't think anyone is interested in playing at this speed) but on single player I found treasures stressful (if you don't get enough of them you lose) and tedious (it's not only a matter of exploring the map quickly but to be lucky enough to notice them which means spending not only cavalry but also constant player's attention). And they never lead to any interesting cavalry combat (either I get first to them, the enemy gets first to them, or I get to them too close to the enemy so that his infantry chases my cavalry : the later case may need some micro skill but usually no real tactic involved since I have very little chance to defeat them as my cavalry is stretched thin in order to find the other treasures). Maybe make treasures either more numerous and smaller or needing more force to capture ? On some maps they're defended by Gaia soldiers but I'm not a fan of it especially when the treasures/gaia forces are too close to the starting point. Maybe have the treasures/defending-forces under a non-capturable building (but not impossible to destroy without siege engines) that sounds an alarm horn (audible/visible by all players) when attacked ? That would leave the option for all players to go try to get them or to attack enemy cavalry/citizens/women (if women get a "dismantle" ability) trying to get them... Or make the treasures visible to everyone at the start of the game ? Especially if they're defended (so that it's not the closest player that gets them, but the most committed), that would allow for real strategic interaction early game... Is it technically possible to have treasures be carried by the unit that fetched them ? Or to have one trader unit at start (trainable in Civic Centers but with a very long time, like 60 seconds, so it's not unremplaceable but still not a good idea to have it killed nor possible to spam them) which would be the only unit able to fetch the treasure ? That way ambushing the units carrying the treasure would be a possible strategy. Actually, the One-Trader-at-Start option would make collecting treasures a real strategic endeavour, and not a lucky grab (to get more than one treasure the player would need to defend the others while s/he manages his travelling salesman), so if it's technically possible it's probably the best option... (and no, I don't know how to make a mod)

Then why not have Civilizations for balanced multiplayer (they don't need to be so many, actually if people want perfectly balanced multiplayer they can just all play the same civilization) and other Civilizations for fun (that would not need to be reduced to the 8 actually available in vanilla) ? As you wrote, it can be done as "sets", and even have some historical background to it, as actual civilization tends to standardize their military equipment and tactics after they get beaten by a superior enemy... So have a "Roman Imperium" set where all civilizations will keep their distinctive skins while getting the roman roster and technology tree ? (minor variations available if they are not unbalanced) Also, Civilizations being unbalanced is not necessarily a problem if there is not one Civilization constantly superior to others; it can even be used as a handicap game (giving the best Civilization in a match or a team game to the lowest ranked player).

Really ? How ? In the "In game" tab of the Settings - Option (in KenWood) I don't see anything of the sort.