@wraitii @elexis I'm going to commit it if you don't have other objections.

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

Rebased for committing.

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

Rebased for committing

In D1960#81924, @Freagarach wrote:

In D1960#81912, @wraitii wrote:

@Freagarach Change reviewers, not subscribed ;)

Ah, so if I want something to be reviewed, I can just add a group as a reviewer? I did not know that! I thought that reviewers picked their own 'projects'? But it is up to me then to invite them? Good to know ;)

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

In D1960#81912, @wraitii wrote:

@Freagarach Change reviewers, not subscribed ;)

Ah, so if I want something to be reviewed, I can just add a group as a reviewer? I did not know that! I thought that reviewers picked their own 'projects'? But it is up to me then to invite them? Good to know ;)

Applied @wraitii's comments.

@Freagarach Change reviewers, not subscribed ;)

In D1661#81903, @elexis wrote:

In D1661#81900, @wraitii wrote:

If this is deployed on the lobby server, shouldn't we merge it ASAP and then possibly open other diffs to improve it?

For that I would have to make a decision I don't like.

In D1661#81900, @wraitii wrote:

If this is deployed on the lobby server, shouldn't we merge it ASAP and then possibly open other diffs to improve it?

If this is deployed on the lobby server, shouldn't we merge it ASAP and then possibly open other diffs to improve it?

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

Dunedans script, modified, extended README, updated ejabberd format of the ipstamp module, deployed at the lobby server.

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

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

Rebased for committing (tomorrow maybe)

Cleaner diff, without dynamic_cast.

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

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

See inlines, but this looks good to me otherwise. Now to actually test it...

Rebased for committing.

Rebased for committing.

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

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

Arbitrarily including some diacritics and omitting others would probably make things more confusing, don't you think? Besides, a single symbol can have different meanings in different languages—those four you call “simple” are already used differently in modern European languages, e.g. French cité is equivalent to Italian città.
In Old Persian, accents were not written, so we don't have to worry about those. However, vowel length is indicated and should thus be properly transcribed.

Sanderd17 ruled that out in 2577 can't remember why.

I meant using simple diacritics :) éèëê and leaving out the rest not to confuse people.

Rebased for committing.

In D1958#81812, @Stan wrote:

In D1958#81809, @wraitii wrote:

In D1958#81807, @Stan wrote:

They have to be separate templates because their stats are independent from the holder.

I meant I don't see why they should descend doom a template_turret template, since they are entirely independent entities on their own. You could have an infantry unit as a turret. Possibly we need to apply some template filtering there.

Oh yeah. Well you'd still have to strip a few things from the template like selectability, looter, unitmotion etc.

Yes, I highly value consistency as well, no disagreement here. However, I'm unsure what you meant with your last remark. Currently diacritics are used in at least some of the specific names of cart, kush, maur, pers, and rome, as well as in those of the Greek factions (athen, mace, ptol, sele, spart).
Anyway, let's limit this patch to the Persians only—it's already expanded far beyond the first diff (changing one of occurrence of Anatolian into Lydian).

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

Well some people say no :) Some also never come back :)

In D1955#81803, @wraitii wrote:

@Freagarach Are you planning to update the diff based on feedback so far?

< While wondering what would happen if I were to say "no": > Yes of course :)
I was just waiting to where the discussion would lead.

Applied @vladislavbelov's comments.

I'd like to showcase tanks for the capitole du libre :)

In D1958#81809, @wraitii wrote:

In D1958#81807, @Stan wrote:

They have to be separate templates because their stats are independent from the holder.

I meant I don't see why they should descend doom a template_turret template, since they are entirely independent entities on their own. You could have an infantry unit as a turret. Possibly we need to apply some template filtering there.

In D1958#81807, @Stan wrote:

They have to be separate templates because their stats are independent from the holder.

I meant I don't see why they should descend doom a template_turret template, since they are entirely independent entities on their own. You could have an infantry unit as a turret. Possibly we need to apply some template filtering there.

I guess a turret ai is a building ai that can rotate and only has one arrow. Currently building ai is restricted to ranged. So I guess I could remove that restriction if the unit is a turret.

As I've said here (staff forum post, sorry):

In D1955#81730, @Freagarach wrote:

What I meant was to alter the C-cmp to look in a "VisualActor.js" sim-cmp rather than in "Identity.js" so that the replacing of the tag could be done in the former. It seems more logical to look for code related to a VisualActor in "VisualActor.js" and not in "Identity.js". The "VisualActor.js" can then use information from the Identity.js" to use and replace the tag.

@Freagarach Are you planning to update the diff based on feedback so far?

Nah I added new things as well. You can see the history since I added all the diffs :)

Just to clarify, this is a rebase of the patch by sanderd17 so far?

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

• Add back decaying when not gathered as @Freagarach asked.
• Fix a few bugs noticed by the unit tests I just added.

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

This time should apply neatly.

Sorry, I didn't get a notification for your answer somehow. I'm still a bit concerned about the diacritics. I personally like them but I can see how it could confuse some people, and I want the game to be an enjoyable experience for everyone.

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

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

Doesn't she switch then ?

Ah yes that's retarded thanks for the fix.

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

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