Dear Shin-ichiro and co-authors,

congratulations to a comprehensive model work and paper on mixed-phase cloud simulations with an innovative particle-based approach. Despite its length, it is concise and clear, implying a wealth of content is presented. I hope the paper deserves the recognition it deserves.
Before acceptance, please include the recommendations of the one Reviewer.
Also find below my detailed list of final remarks (mostly language/phrasing issues)

Best wishes,
Simon

Several comments for a final polishing:
p.8, l.1: introduce the name of the physical quantity in front of q_d
p.9.: circumScircle=circumcircle; defiend = defined
p.9., l.18: You may explicitly state that this flaw is removed in the newer version 2.2.2.
p.10, l.15 and p.13, l.2: I am always picky about the expression "cold temperature".
p.12, l.20: Ice crystals with mass m_min^i re rather small. Don't you include a Kelvin correction, such that ice crystals wouldn't for too small supersaturation w.r.t ice?
p.18, Eqs. 55-57: I appreciate the way, the units are handled. (No changes needed.)
p.23,l.1: Is G_lmn defined at the center of the grid cell? "at each grid point" is not specific enough in my sense.
p.23, l.7: I guess you miss to say that the sets are called I_r(t) and I_s(t).
p.23, Eq.83 & 83: With Dirac's delta, you evaluate n at a discrete point. There can only be one droplet at this location and I do not understand how a concentration is a reasonable quantity. Concentrations can only defined fro a continuum in my personal opinion.
p.25, l.5: Remove dot after "Figure"
p.25, l.13: Could you reformulate "For consistency of wind velocity field divergence, .."? I am having troubles understanding it.
p.26, l.7: "is much shorter than THAT OF other processes"
p.26, l.18: From the way it is written, it is not clear, whether or not you assume sphericitiy and neglect the ventilation effect. Please rephrase.
p.30, l.27: Add "Eq." in front of (95).
p.39, l.32: You may better say: "The ice particle WHOSE POSITION is denoted by ...". This issue appears several times.
Fig.6 and several others: I would say: "The figure is the same as Fig.5, except for the (physical quantity on the) vertical axis" (remove at least "difference" in the end).
p.45, l.9: "suppress the amount of" sounds awkward. I would say, some process can be suppressed, but not a quantity.
p.63, l.7: Do you mean "heating rate"? Or is "warming rate" something else?
p.65, l.14: Is p defined as ratio collected over collector? Then p<1 makes sense.
p.65, l.29: Please reformulate. "Calculating the properties of the resultant ice crystal .."?

Dear Shin-ichiro and co-authors

congratulations to a comprehensive model work and paper on mixed-phase cloud simulations with an innovative particle-based approach. Despite its length, it is concise and clear, implying a wealth of content is presented. I hope the paper deserves the recognition it deserves.

Best wishes,
Simon