m_data = (m_data & ~(0x3 << 2 * i)) | (static_cast<u64>(v & 0x3) << 2 * i); -> m_data = (m_data & ~(static_cast<u64>(0x3) << 2 * i)) | (static_cast<u64>(v & 0x3) << 2 * i);
else 0x3 is 32bit integer

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

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

Re-rebase adrian's patch

I guess you can also update _default.xml map to use 9 players.

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

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

In D2667#112888, @Angen wrote:

Aside from this I got idea how this could be unlimited number of players.
You would need to store inside PlayerData an array of m_data and work with the value based on index you get.
Lets say you store m_data as u32. So if you get index 0 - 16 you get first item from array. If you get index from 17 - 32 you get second item from array and subtract 16 from index.

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

Might be worth checking if there are any tips referencing that as well.

Not in any gui/text/tips/* file.

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

Update worker elephant tooltip (cf. D2578).

Might be worth checking if there are any tips referencing that as well.

Compared to other occurrences in code base, it makes sense to return undefined rather then just empty return.

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

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

Aside from this I got idea how this could be unlimited number of players.
You would need to store inside PlayerData an array of m_data and work with the value based on index you get.
Lets say you store m_data as u32. So if you get index 0 - 16 you get first item from array. If you get index from 17 - 32 you get second item from array and substract 16 from index.

Working version :)

Alright, i can move the test to line 92 cache the result and then retest. (with apropriate comments)

In D2671#112871, @nephele wrote:

Else at the very least I'd prefer to test the need for execinfo once at the beginning, so that we don't have calls to the compiler in the middle of our (already complex) prebuild logic.

Why would it matter?

Would it be easy to detect musl?

No, it wouldn't, and detecting musl does not seem desireable either since the libc is supposed to be useable anyway.
We basically only need to figure out if the symbol is available in the system libc or not, which this test does.

I see. In that case I suppose this is OK (I find it rather ugly but that's personal taste).

and waiting for the test compilation would slow down the pre-build process.

Atleast for my (by now low-to-medium end) system it's a negligable ammount of time.

Hi! Thanks for your contribution.

Thanks for the rebase @s0600204! Jenkins is indeed broken when source files are deleted (or moved) but there is still a build error on a clean build due to the test file.

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

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

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

Different approach.

(I still think constructing a building should not necessarily be tied to Health.)

Itms said this was not the correct way to do, it I'll let him explain why.

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

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

It looks good to me. Only small grey area for me is that citizen cavalry is slightly faster as a result (x1.95 to x2.0) but at this point it's just nitpicking, I don't think it will have noticeable effect to balance.

Updated because of rP23559/D2659.

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

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

@Feldfeld, any opinions on this?

I personally have nothing against this, I think a slight imbalance between traders will not change much there. Can ask @ValihrAnt just in case.

forgot maur gate loot

@Feldfeld anything against? If yes do we agree that camel traders need to have the same footprint, one or another?

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

For what's it worth, I believe I ran a few AI vs AI test games when I proposed this patch in December, and didn't notice any difference. Cavalry footprint area is still much larger than that of Infantry, footprint length is unchanged, and Structure attack spread is typically low.
You can implement the patch with arc patch D2496 and try it out yourself.

• garrison heal to 5 (temples have 3)
• garrison capacity from 30 to 50 (temples have 20)
• garrison classes to Support or Soldier, which means you can also garrison war elephants inside (worker elephants were already possible)

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

I have nothing against this patch, in the current state of the game it would do no harm, but i would like to note that if we are in a situation where champions are balanced and viable then suddenly persians would become (by far i think) the civ who would be able to spam them the fastest entering city phase and it could become a problem in that case.

I also think it might affect balance. Here it is not the balance between civs but the balance between units which is also important (to compare, right now champions aren't really viable compared to citizen soldier which is a problem). If cav become harder to hit it would buff them. Now i don't know if this patch actually noticeably changes balance or not, but to me it would be the kind of patch that could use some testing to be on the safe side of things.
If it does affect balance but we still want that patch then maybe cavalry would have to be nerfed in some other stats.

This patch is practically superseded by D2659/rP23559 (thanks, Angen). Maybe it should be abandoned/closed, or replaced with a different differential?

Is there another differential for the Seleucid Cavalry Javelinist? It's also a Persian unit.

Is it? It looks like ordinary Greek cavalry. Maybe you're confused with something else?

I know I am late to the game, but I agree with making the Scythe Chariot into a champion for the Persians. I already did this over a year ago for the Persians in Delenda Est.

This patch already changed it into a champion; it's just not trainable yet, because that would be a gameplay balance change, but there is a patch available for that. And yeah, I already did that in my 0abc mod long ago.
Feel free to propose patches for uncontroversial improvements you made in Delenda Est (e.g. art corrections), so they can be incorporated into the public folder. That'll make your mod smaller to download and easier to maintain in the long run; besides, the default game and other mods can also benefit.

some more comments

Fixed in rP23560

Thanks for the commit @Angen :)

I'll fix the S when committing, thanks for the patch.

In rP23484#41603, @Stan wrote:

In rP23484#41600, @OptimusShepard wrote:

FXAA doesn't work on my linux system. On dual boot Windows it's working.
Manjaro 64Bit, Radeon RX 570

interestinglog.html6 KBDownload

Same map? It doesn't work on all maps if postprocessing is disabled on the map settings...

In rP23484#41600, @OptimusShepard wrote:

FXAA doesn't work on my linux system. On dual boot Windows it's working.
Manjaro 64Bit, Radeon RX 570

interestinglog.html6 KBDownload