SMST

Which is why I asked, now that the Iberian Javelinist is moved to the Iberians. (It is the same unit, given the texture names and all) My attempt would be to have a Cavalry Javelinist for the Iberians to get the flaming javelin ability and leaving the Infantry Javelinist with the Carthaginians. (And if you can move the Iberian Javelinist to its faction of origin, you can also move the Celtic Swordsman to his respective faction.) I made an attempt to create an Iberian Cavalry Javelinist some time ago, along with Celtic Slingers. Image attached.

Well, that would work for me, too. What do the Carthagenians get for a Infantry Javelinist now?

"Emporion" is a mindblowingly generic name for a settlement, similiar as if some British colonists in the New World would've called their colony "Market".

There is an Iberian Javelinist? EDIT: SVN tells me now there is one. That's great. A Cavalry Javelinist would've been nicer, though, seeing that Iberia has just one type of cavalry right now.

About that. Wouldn't it make more sense to have Sassanids rather than Parthians? Or maybe a mixture of both?

Didn't know about the game, until I googled "Epona" just now. Don't know it relates to Iberia in any ways either, though.

A cool name would be "Epona", which is a Celtic warrior goddess, though I'm not sure how that would relate to the Iberians. A shame you won't put off the Iberians to Alpha 6, 'cause then you could name the child "Falcata".

Females are planned to be better at gathering food and enhance the gathering rate of men gatherimg nearby. Besides, you may want to have females do economy in the late game when most of the soldiers are needed for fighting.

Sounds fine.

That's exactly the point. The word "ball" derived from βάλλω at a earlier time, showing that the word had a "b"-sound in ancient days, instead of the "v"-sound it has today. The exact maning of βάλλω (which I spell as ballô) is not important here, I just wanted to show you the ethymological evolution, which can allow us to link to the phonetic evolution of a character. EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta Oh, I agree about "Sitoboleion", though "i"- and "ei"-syllabes are exchangable most of the time.

I am perfectly able to read Greek characters, so that's no problem for me. η is a character that was used in Ancient Greek to describe a long "e"-vowel (ε would be a short e-vowel). It has changed to a long "i"-vowel (which is very similar phonetically) in Modern Greek. So η should be transscribed to "e" or maybe "ê" for the purpose of this game. This explains the confusion about Trieres - Triiris, Strategion - Stratigion, Limen - Limin. As I said, it should be the "e"-sound in this game. βάλλω/βάλλειν can mean many things - to put, to set, but also to throw, from which meaning the English word "ball" derives, which shows that β was originally indeed "b" and not "v".

I've created some units for Macedonia, which I based on the descriptions in this document. (though not throughout) They are the Pezhetairoi (re-arranged super unit of original 0 A.D., split up in basic, advanced, elite), Agranian Peltastai (they are using the Ekdromoi tunics in Elite Status as placeholder) and Xystophoroi (the Elite needs a different texture with cloak) The Xystophoros in particular needs some work, but what do you think?

Okay, you are right about Oikos, sorry about that. However, most of your corrections use Modern Greek spelling, like "triiris", which ist "trieres" in Ancient Greek. "Limin" would be "limen". "Sitovolion" is "Sitobolion". (the b-Sound changed into a v-sound during history) I'm not sure about "strategion/strategeion" alltogether, this seems to be something made up. I would suggest "stratopedion", meaning "army camp", though it refers more to a temporary camp than to a stationary. "tyra" means "door" (in fact, the German word "Tür" is derived from that, I think), and "pyle" (as it should be written, not "pule") means gate. Maybe "tyra" can mean gate, but "pyle" would be more common. (Theromopylai!) Sorry I was harsh, earlier.

May I interrupt? Davarish, you are wronging correct things (Oikon, Sitobolion etc.) The choices you make seem to be modern Greek to me, but most of the stuff you wanted to correct IS correct in Ancient Greek. "Ploion" may be a good word for ship, like "naus", which is the only thing you are correct about.

A note, which I already made to Michael some time ago: The Iberians have a ability to fire flaming javelins, yet they have no javelinists in their unit roster. I'd say that they at least get a cavalry javelinist, since there is an Iberian infantry javelinist in the Carthaginian roster and they already have a slinger unit for ranged attack. 24 in total, so that they can use the whole alphabet. Honestly, no idea.

Very neat design document. One small note: Since most civilisations of 0 A.D. follow the mechanism "Super Infantry + Super Cavalry", you might consider to move the Charioteer to the Super Cavalry slot (this would also allow for the Charioteer to have ranged AND melee attack, as you planned it to have). You could lose the Super Archer in favor of the Chariot. This would leave the Egyptians without any citizen soldier cavalry whatsoever, of course. Also, I know you are into New Kingdom Egyptians, but I would love to see the Pyramids and Obelisks which are already in the game to be aviable as special buildings for Egypt!

The Roman maniple evolved out of the phalanx, I think. But I believe that is the special tech for the Romans, then.

HELL YEAH!

The Phalanx formation is a unique tech for the Hellenes, so I think there won't be a Phalanx tech for other civs. By the way, there is a Excel sheet with a technology tree draft for Celts and Hellenes somewhere in the game files.

Apparently something was wrong with my old directory. When I set a new path for the Checkout directory, it worked without any problems. Strange. Thanks.

Hey all, I recently wanted to update 0 A.D. to the newest version via SVN, which wanted a authentification from me, unlike the last couple of times I updated the game. Don't really know if you deactivated it for us "commoners", but it would be nice to get the newest status without having to install the game all over again.

Well, Italy today is pretty much Western, isn't it? And I don't see them having a vastly different culture from the rest of Western Europe since the fall of Rome, either. At least not in the sense as "Western","Middle Eastern","Far Eastern" etc. goes. Byzantium is a different matter, but the cultural sphere of that one was pretty much absorbed by the Ottoman Empire after 1452. That's why I also wanted to split the Mediterranean faction up into Western and Middle Eastern, but that would be weird gamplay-wise.

It wouldn't make sense, since Italy is Western European in culture. It would be weird if you had France, England, Germany etc. all in one faction and then Italy seperate. I have to say, though, that this is true for Russia as well, sadly. Although this particular country is percieved to be seperate from Western Europe far more than Italy or any other.

Hmm. Mycenaeans would be the dominant theme of the Mediterranean Bronze Age. I don't know if there are specific Italian cultures that would compare with them, so the differentiation between Greece and Rome/Italy would begin in the Iron Age, where the player would be able to choose his subfactions. Sumerians are actually pre-Bronze age, I think - for the Middle Eastern Bronze Age ingame I'd like to use Hittites and early Babylonians. You are right, though, that the choosing of the subfactions of the Middle East should take place earlier than the Iron Age, since the cultures there were more differentiated, and that earlier than in Mediterranean Europe. So the Byzantines evolving into Russian?