Successful build - Chance fights ever on the side of the prudent.

Linter detected issues:
Executing section Source...

source/simulation2/components/CCmpFootprint.cpp
|   1| /*·Copyright·(C)·2018·Wildfire·Games.
|    | [NORMAL] LicenseYearBear:
|    | License should have "2020" year instead of "2018"
Executing section JS...
Executing section cli...

Link to build: https://jenkins.wildfiregames.com/job/docker-differential/1874/display/redirect

Interesting diff. What kind of gameplay feature do you envision supporting?

Together with D2658 this could allow forests regrowing. But also things like structure add-ons (cf. Terran in Starcraft).

Or building a farmstead will spawn fields around it?

Yeah sure :)

In D2657#113149, @Freagarach wrote:

Together with D2658 this could allow forests regrowing. But also things like structure add-ons (cf. Terran in Starcraft).

I thought about doing this with a blacksmith added to a barracks. Another one might be turrets or siege weapons added to walls. But perhaps that would be under entity upgrade or as a garrison?

This patch allows buildings to be build too close to other buildings, outside territory and everything else that buildRestrictions forbids. We should somehow reuse that code here too.

Out of scope/irrelevant comment:
This patch highlights an issue in the current template shema's: I have found two places where passability is defined. Namely buildrestriction and unitmotion (if there are more please let me know). These can be totally independent, which can cause problems on its own: a buildable unit with unitmotion (nothing fancy here), can be build only on land and move only in sea. Since we can't paint terrain (yet), this unit is completely unmoveable. This seems weird. On the other hand it might make sortof sense for ships, build them on the shore and use them in water. (Might need some way to transfer them into the water).