Solve the gender unconsistency

[alexhultman]

First of all I want to say that I absolutley love this project. This game will surely be a classic for ages since it can be forked and compiled for new platforms when needed. I just have one thought about the gender unconsistency. Women are obviously the main workers in the game but some men can work too.

• Why can't women build advanced structures? This makes no sence.
• Why can some warrirors (like three kinds minus the cavalry ones) also work? Shouldn't women be the workers only? I believe you are trying to make something new here but I really feel this just adds to the gameplay complexity. Don't get me wrong, I'm all about gender equality but it feels right to let warriors (men) be warriors and workers (hard working women) be workers. At least they should be able to build what the men can build.

Also, there is unconsistency in the "find idle workers" button. This button finds women, working men but also men that are on a horse and obviously cannot work. I really believe making women the workers and men the warriors can reduce gameplay complexity. Also, you will face major animation problems with the current approach since men that are both warriors and workers often have shields and spears and stuff but when they are lumbering wood or minig their equipment just disappear. I hardly think you could fix that glitch. I love women but I really think you should let them be the workers (who can build advanced structures too) and let men be the warriors. (Okay some Heroes are women but you get the idea)

This is obviously inspired by Age of Empies. I love that game and have played it since I was a kid. They use villagers for constructing things and gathering stuff and warriors for war. I think that is a key thing. Any thoughts about his?

[Erik Johansson]

I'll close this (after explaining why things are the way they are of course ;) ), because you're basically asking us to remove one of the basic "features"/ideas of the game. Let me begin with this:

> Citizen Soldiers

In the ancient world there were not only warriors who were professional soldiers and had fighting as their job, there were also Citizen Soldiers who most of the time worked with something else (typically farming) and only sometimes picked up their weapons and went to war. In 0 A.D. we simulate this by having some units who can both do economical tasks (gather resources, build buildings, repair buildings) and fight. Typically trained at the Civic Centre and Barracks. Compare Super Units and heroes.

That explains why we have units that work I would hope :) (See ​http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/Manual_Terminology for more information) As to why horse units are included: they can hunt, actually they're the only ones who really are good at hunting.

The units weapons/shields disappearing when gathering is intended, after all, would they generally have their weapons in hand while gathering? (Maybe in extreme situations, but if nothing else it would look strange if they both had weapons and say a rake for tending the crops in their hands.)

We'll see whether we'll keep the limitation on what women can build, but the limit is more along the line of: women=can only build economical buildings, infantry citizen soldiers=can build both economical buildings and buildings geared towards warfare (if nothing else this further illustrates their dual role as both workers and warriors).

[alexhultman]

Fair enough. I would like to see women building what men can build though. Currently you can place a fortress with a man and then let women build the construction. This makes no sence. Why can women build but not place advanced structures? It's an alpha version I know but..