In D5055#222589, @wowgetoffyourcellphone wrote:

How is this coming in the community mod. You guys like it?

How is this coming in the community mod. You guys like it?

Good with me if it makes other people happy

I'm all in favor now that its 0.15 m/s per unit.

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

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

Changes speed boost from 0.20 to 0.15 as suggested

In D5179#220217, @wowgetoffyourcellphone wrote:

I think rams in general could start maybe 20% slower and maybe we can keep the 0.2 speed boost per soldier. Thoughts?

I think rams in general could start maybe 20% slower and maybe we can keep the 0.2 speed boost per soldier. Thoughts?

In D5179#220208, @borg- wrote:

I agree with @real_tabasco_sauce about changing it to 1.5 instead of 2, but I don't see any problems with the pers and kush rams.

I agree with @real_tabasco_sauce about changing it to 1.5 instead of 2, but I don't see any problems with the pers and kush rams.

I think it should be 0.15 not 0.2, otherwise the rams could outrun melee infantry, which could be problematic imo. Also, I think the persian and kushite rams should start a little slower owing to their 'big ram' civ bonus. That way they are not faster than the smaller rams when they garrison 12 units inside.

https://gitlab.com/0ad/0ad-community-mod-a26/-/merge_requests/29/diffs

In D5055#218690, @borg- wrote:

I would just reduce the attack rate instead of the attack dmg for ranged. This should have the same effect and perhaps help with performance, by having fewer simultaneous objects.

I would just reduce the attack rate instead of the attack dmg for ranged. This should have the same effect and perhaps help with performance, by having fewer simultaneous objects.

Maybe a little less aggressive for initial tests like +1.20 attack for melee units and 0.90 for ranged? When was armor reduced?

Yeah, sad. ;P

I kinda like the idea of elephants being a bane to your own troops and damaging them. This is pretty historical and kind of takes the place of the old defunct "Run Amok" feature. BUT... I accepted the patch since it is still reasonable to remove it for simplicity's sake.

Its not meant to be a super significant area of effect. The main thing is that the 1 targeted unit isnt the only one damaged when units are very close (basically right under the rock). This will only marginally improve catapults effect vs infantry, but the main interest is that it can create some exciting/funny moments.

In D5053#217074, @wowgetoffyourcellphone wrote:

Would 1 meter be noticeable by players?

Would 1 meter be noticeable by players?

sure I understand, thank you. in this case I don't see any problems and I think it's a good addition.

@borg- the projectile damage must be reduced because the target receives both splash damage and projectile damage.
The targeted unit or structure would receive the same damage before and after this patch.

Maybe keep the damage as it is and just add the splash with the proposed values?

In D4736#215457, @borg- wrote:

@Freagarach can commit it?

When I find the time to do so, yes. ^^

@Freagarach can commit it?

I think catapult efficiency is pretty good right now, so I'm not in favor of changing the root damage. Regarding splash damage, it seems like good numbers.

I think it's an interesting resource, but not sure for elephants.

In D4736#215095, @Freagarach wrote:

@borg- can you make your patches with Public view policy, please. :)

@borg- can you make your patches with Public view policy, please. :)

In D4736#215040, @borg- wrote:

If you decide to commit this, then can you make these changes?

Will do, sir!

accept again after rebase.

@Freagarach the accept of @real_tabasco_sauce is new. @chrstgtr also apparently accepted, just didn't press the button hehe. There were others accepting it, but when editing the patch I removed the old reviews and lost it. Thanks for looking at the patch, I'll make the grammar adjustments. If you decide to commit this, then can you make these changes?

In D4736#214979, @asterix wrote:

@Freagarach I believe this could be committed as others expressed their agreements?

I see merely one acceptance and it is outdated (i.e. the patch has been significantly updated since).

@Freagarach I believe this could be committed as others expressed their agreements?

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

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

Fix gerousia visible classes.

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

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

up

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

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

up

In D4736#214919, @borg- wrote:

@chrstgtr opnion?

@chrstgtr opnion?

Well, I don't think there is a downside to explaining their promotion, but if you think its better left off, I am fine with it.
An idea for agis can be a separate patch.

In D4736#214849, @real_tabasco_sauce wrote:

I still cannot accept by the way. I think you have to set the repository to public

I still cannot accept by the way. I think you have to set the repository to public

In D5053#214839, @chrstgtr wrote:

In D5053#214836, @real_tabasco_sauce wrote:

yes, increasing splash area rapidly makes the splash stronger. So by limiting the area to 1, the snowball effect is pretty much capped. I can't remember what the area was in a23, but I am sure it was larger.

I meant that my understanding was that the total dmg done by a cata gets spread out over the entire splash area. So a larger area means that the avg impact is less because dmg is spread out whereas a small area means the avg impact is more. So a large splash area might do a little bit of dmg to a larger number of units but a small splash area might single-shot a smaller (but still considerable) number of units.

Please correct me if I’m wrong.

There is a direct attack which is 250 and the splash is applied uniformly on the 1m radius area.
The way it is currently set up is the directly hit unit is dead, and maybe 1-3 additional units nearby are hurt.

@chrstgtr it is now on mod.io, so we could organize a game on it sometime. I don't know how long the other patches will take for a27, so we may as well try it out now.

Think it makes sense to test in community mod and then address with required adjustments, if there are any. A change this big will need lots of play testing

In D5053#214836, @real_tabasco_sauce wrote:

yes, increasing splash area rapidly makes the splash stronger. So by limiting the area to 1, the snowball effect is pretty much capped. I can't remember what the area was in a23, but I am sure it was larger.

yes, increasing splash area rapidly makes the splash stronger. So by limiting the area to 1, the snowball effect is pretty much capped. I can't remember what the area was in a23, but I am sure it was larger.

I’m generally fine with the idea of splash dmg.

I’m generally fine with the idea of splash dmg.

As we discussed in the group chat, I think these are a great set of changes for sparta.
Many of these changes may also be easily balanced as needed. No idea if this is now on the cards for a27, but I will accept to record my thumbs up.

Any ideas for Aegis 3 aura??

In D4736#214350, @borg- wrote:

@real_tabasco_sauce
I'm not sure about the tooltip referring to the Olympic champion. I see no connection between Lycurgus laws and Olympic champions.

@real_tabasco_sauce
I'm not sure about the tooltip referring to the Olympic champion. I see no connection between Lycurgus laws and Olympic champions.

In D4736#214346, @real_tabasco_sauce wrote:

On the directory issue, the file says for example:

data/mods/public/simulation/templates/units/spart/champion_infantry_spear.xml

when it should say

binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/templates/units/spart/champion_infantry_spear.xml

On the directory issue, the file says for example:

In D4736#214341, @borg- wrote:

What would svn diff -x -U5000 be?

Parent directory
Tooltip lycurgus laws

What would svn diff -x -U5000 be?

@borg-
I think you have to generate the patch in the parent directory. So go out one directory and then generate the patch. Also if you are using svn use:

Build failure - The Moirai have given mortals hearts that can endure.

Build failure - The Moirai have given mortals hearts that can endure.

Up based on balancing group on forum.

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

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

update heavy warship.

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

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

half the current modifier.
Adjust tootip to be very vague

• for the description of the tooltip, be aware of #6755
  • DelendaEst often uses a more vague language for describing the effect of the BatchTimeModifier
  • github.com/JustusAvramenko/delenda_est

• Units derived from template_unit_ship_heavy.xml still fire infinitely when ordered directly to attack a structure that is just enough in range.
  • Ref: rP25341 (templates/template_unit_ship_quinquereme.xml was renamed to template/template_unit_ship_warship_heavy.xml in rP27341)

In D4961#211483, @real_tabasco_sauce wrote:

keep in mind, they already have the crossbow training upgrade which allows xbows to be trained almost as fast as women (as fast if they have the roman bonus)