Genava55

I would say that if it currently works with win8, it is pure luck.

https://www.linuxmadesimple.info/2024/10/how-to-install-0-ad-on-linux-mint-22.html?m=1

Microsoft stopped supporting Windows 8 in 2023. And this is a very unpopular OS. So I won't expect 0AD to work with Win8 and clearly it is not in the scope of the devs to maintain compatibility with it.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-58581-0 A comparison of income inequality in the Roman and Chinese Han empires The emergence of vast territorial empires is a recurring development in the history of human civilization. Their ability to extract resources from their subjects, and to redistribute them, also increases the potential of higher levels of economic inequality. Here we explore how imperial structures contributed to set the level of inequality in two ancient empires, the Roman Empire ca. 165 CE and the Chinese Han Empire ca. 2 CE. We estimate the overall levels of imperial inequality as the combination of inequality between and within regions. We find that the Han Empire was, overall, more unequal and extractive than the Roman Empire. Other empires, however, were even more extractive, as shown by a comparison with the Aztec Empire ca. 1492. We argue that higher inequality increased the potential for political instability and the collapse of empires.

I'm a bit worried to see that the most competitive players are proposing some pretty extreme things, like speeding up the pace of the game even more or even removing the concept of citizen-soldiers (or militiamen). @wowgetoffyourcellphone tested a number of ideas in his mod that might be of interest. Mercenaries and slaves in particular. It has to be said that he tries out new concepts and goes beyond the fairly restricted AoE-like framework. If you need to recruit quickly, mercenaries would be the best approach, as they should be able to be recruited very quickly. I also think that the opposition between women and militiamen isn't done in the right way. At the moment, the woman only costs food, can't defend herself and has a tiny advantage when it comes to gathering. Whereas the militiaman costs extra wood, can defend himself and harvest all resources. I think it's a shame that the basic unit that can defend itself costs wood. I think the militiaman should only cost food. Historically, hoplites and legionaries obtained their equipment themselves. It was only with professionalization that the state began to pay for the equipment. The state pays for logistics, i.e. food, clothing, ammunition, etc. We could have an opposition between militiamen and slaves. The slave would cost more than the militiaman but would be more efficient at harvesting. They can't defend themselves. They can't create/initiate buildings, but they can help build them. It would be a way of highlighting an important facet of ancient societies. Javelineers and slingers should still cost extra ressources (wood notably) because they are consuming munitions.

I always felt like the game was being taken over by a very competitive community.

Description from their website: openage is a free (as in freedom) cross-platform RTS game engine that provides the mechanics of Age of Empires. We use C++20, OpenGL/GLSL, Python, Qt and CMake to allow people using GNU/Linux, BSD, macOS or Windows to play the game natively. Our aim is to make openage a platform for the original Age of Empires games providing the same look and feel, but with more features for modding and multiplayer. Engine: openage is intended as a powerful platform that runs any Age of Empires release and can even be used to make your own RTS games! Modding: openage uses an open API powered by our human-readable, easy-to-understand configuration languages. Multiplayer: We are implementing a client-server architecture with dedicated servers that supports more than 8 players. The overarching system will provide matchmaking, lobbies, server discovery and other community features. openage is a community project that values every contribution, the only requirement is your enthusiasm. Don't hesitate to get in touch with us if you want to help!

So it has nothing to do with "from the historical standpoint"

Wouldn't you like to elaborate? I'm proposing this precisely to include more historical elements and show that there was more diversity than we think. Even if they're different factions grouped together, they're all based on the same civilisational foundation. The aim is not to mix peoples who have nothing to do with each other.

No news? No additional info?

A lack of color and features in general

In addition, the assembly building could have some visuals to reflect the different tribes from your coalition. It can be a flag, items, animal standards etc. Each tribe would have its own symbol, using coinage, pottery and jewelry as evidence. For example the Veneti: The Treveri: The Boii: etc.

Sarmatian https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/327424

Not for the moment but as I said, the type Alesia and Port helmets are from a later period. The only helmets that would fit the Cimbrian war are: - the Celtic Montefortino like those found in Förk, Apahida, Ciumesti, Moscano di Fabriano etc. Either in bronze or in iron. - the Italic Montefortino, the same the Romans used. It was also used by other people, especially during the 2nd century BC. Exclusively in bronze. - the simple Coolus helmet, also called Coolus-Mannheim. Exclusively in bronze. I would suggest you to use only these ones: Also avoid using the lenticular/almond shaped shield. I don't think there is evidence for its use by the Germans.

Have you considered supporting formats like AV1 ?

We had this conversation in the past: However, we have to admit that this opinion makes less and less sense. I already didn't approve of it, but you have to admit that the Roman faction hardly represents the republic of the Punic Wars.

Le sanctuaire du clos du château de Mandeure est un ensemble cultuel de l'époque gauloise situé dans le Doubs. https://www.persee.fr/doc/galia_0016-4119_2007_num_64_1_3319

https://twitter.com/Sudan_tweet/status/1904626617001124281

Elephants!

Another similar idea that could give the game more flexibility on certain factions would be to include certain references to specific tribes. I'm thinking in particular of the Gauls: we could take advantage of the assembly building to include technologies linked to various tribes emblematic of their history, and other tribes with interesting characteristics. The Arverni, Aedui and Belgians, for example, are emblematic peoples, with interesting historical figures and different characteristics. But there are also lesser-known tribes who were mentioned by the Romans and Greeks and took part in historic events. It would be conceivable to form coalitions in the assembly building, in order to gain certain attributes specific to certain tribes. Acquire new bonuses or new units. For example, the Treveri were known as the best horsemen in Gaul, or the Veneti had the best fleet of all Gallic tribes. We could move the assembly building (Remogantion) to the second phase. Then make certain units dependent on the choices the player makes in creating his coalition. Adding a tribe to your coalition should have a certain starting cost, but with a doubling of the cost for each additional tribe you add to the coalition. For example, 100F/100W/100M for the first tribe, 200F/200W/200M for the second, 400F/400W/400M for the third, and so on. - Aquitanians would unlock the recruitment of Soliduroi (champion swordsmen) and give a bonus of hit points to heroes (to represent bodyguards). - The Treveri would give several cavalry bonuses to represent their reputation as the best cavalry in Gaul. - The Lemovices would give bonuses in metal extraction to represent the numerous gold mines they exploited. - The Veneti would give bonuses to all ships, including fishing boats and merchant ships. - The Boii would give bonuses to infantry to represent the warriors who fought in Italy and used pilum similar to the Romans. - Alpine peoples would unlock the recruitment of axe-wielding warriors and naked fanatics. etc. This is just a series of examples that I can extend and explain in detail the historical and archaeological points.

Opensource and linux compatible. It is impossible to block all cheaters and too difficult for a small community. However it is important to maintain the pure rejection and social shaming of people cheating on multiplayer games. Ban them at sight.

Sadly the means for cheating are disproportionate in comparison to the means to fight them.