Sophokles

Is there any reason why circular maps are not more common? You can describe them using Cartesian planes and all that good stuff, so I would expect many RTS's to use round maps.

Who exactly is providing the music? I remember the Wesnoth dude on the forum once, he's pretty good. Not Jeff van Dyck or Hans Zimmer quality, of course, but still good for a serious open source game.

I think the problem is that for naming to be consistent, the map has to be "romanocentric" or "hellenocentric". By that I mean the names have to be Latin or Greek. If we want Macedon to be Makedonia, for example, it only makes sense that Carthage is not Carthago but Karkhēdōn. Roman names are more easily recognised, of course, and extend into Western Europe. Also, Romans were known for using native names for cities but feminine Latin names for regions. The list is endless: Graecia, Iberia, Italia, Persia, Brittania, Germania, Gallia, Africa, Asia, Laconia, etc. I find it interesting that the map shows cities rather than the Roman provinces that we're all used to.

The proportions are horrendous, but it's a very beautiful scene.

Am I the only one experiencing extreme lag? I have a super-powerful 64bit Windows 7 laptop, yet it several seconds for the game to catch up with the cursor, making it unplayable.

Only a matter of time before this debate would reach the forum. Here's what I know: holding the spear over the shoulder allows you to swing the spear in an arc, exploiting gravity AND the force of the upper body. However, this doesn't work so well in tight formation. The end of the spear would be swinging around at head level behind you. Holding the spear under your shoulder is obviously more stable, and allows for a phalanx. So, it would it safe to say that the overhand stance was only used by hoplites in open fighting, like after a formation breaks, and not in a square/phalanx. The information we have available also indicates that this applies to shorter spears and javelins, because the longer sarissa would be too unwieldy to hold in any way except under the armpit. Therefore, the underhand stance was most likely used more in Hellenistic armies than before that.

Yes, but the difficulty comes from the fact that they did not have "official" flags, banners, etc. I'm guessing the artists will use religious imagery, since that is what commanders back then did anyway.

Macedon- Vergina Star City states- Wreath of laurels Britons- Geometric pattern using metal-embossed circles Gauls- Double bladed axe, maybe Persians- Faravahar Carthage- Tanit symbol, crescent, or any other lunar thing Iberians- Falcata sword? Simplicity and accuracy. Success. [Raises arms in Christ-like manner]

Can you explain what anisotropic filtering is? I know it makes things more visually pleasing, which is why it's often alongside anti-aliasing, but I can't find a good description of what it *does*.

0AD with Globulation sounds cool, but it would require a radically different engine (unlike the other modes you mentioned), so it has no chance of being in the core game. Also, you would have to reduce the variety of units to make it feasible, like in Globulation. The computer might send archers and javileneers into the front lines simply because they were spawned before the melee units.

Following a single person can be limiting. A Punic Wars campaign, for example, can go from Scipio to the king of Syracuse to Tiberius Sempronius Longus if necessary.

1. There is a Rise and Fall post somewhere 2. Solar deck? Epic. 3. In addition to substructures, as you mentioned, I also meant more complex docks. Longer docks can logically moor more (no rhyme intended) ships at the same time. Don't forget drydocks/launching platforms. Shipwrights, at that time or at any time, didn't launch ships by the sides of commercial docks.

Are ports going to be the standard square buildings as seen in every other RTS? Not that there is anything wrong with that, but there is plenty of potential. The port of Carthage, for example, was very efficient and very expensive. I think that should be reflected in the game. My idea, therefore, is to allow the player to individually place elements of the harbor once he designates a land/water interface as a port. Normal piers could allow loading/unloading, shipwright's piers would be for building and repairing, maritime warehouses in the port could facilitate trade routes, etc. You could make the port idea even more needlessly complicated by having complex interactions between the port structures and land markets, with the forum/agora/bazaar being populated by importers cashing in on the nearby shipping hub. Yes, I am aware that what I just mentioned is too complex for any game to actually benefit from. Still, it's an interesting thought (variably sized docks, protected harbors, things like that).

Very clever. The only problem is that I don't see a decent Iberian role. Which raises the question, do they deserve a campaign? Witness the following threadCampaign Mode

That's true. Adrenaline is a powerful hormone that can make psioli and toxotes run faster than a stallion on fire. Then again, running is going to be implemented soon, right? How is that going to work?