I will test it, but being a strong unit is not enough for a nerf. They are relatively expensive and need elephant stables, so it is just that they are strong, what cannot be op, enough to win all games, like slings in the alpha23 for example.

In D3599#157026, @wraitii wrote:

In D3599#156997, @borg- wrote:

Having to build ele stables is a fair drawback, but they are _strong_ units.
Having them take 2/3 pop would make sense IMO given how bulky they are.
I'm not sure about the HP increase - I think they also have higher armor - need to check consistency with other eles and with cav.

−50% damage with +50% health makes them effectively 25% weaker (0.5×1.5=0.75).
One should also keep in mind elephants can't gather and cavalry moves much faster.

In D3602#157030, @Freagarach wrote:

Kinda makes sense: Strengthening own culture.

I'm not sure about the HP increase - I think they also have higher armor - need to check consistency with other eles and with cav.

Health and resistances:

basic infantry             :  50 ;  1 ,  1 , 10
basic infantry spearman    : 100 ;  5 ,  5 , 15
basic cavalry archer       : 100 ;  3 ,  1 , 15
basic cavalry spearman     : 160 ;  4 ,  3 , 15
elephant archer            : 200 ;  4 ,  3 , 15

Kinda makes sense: Strengthening own culture.

In D3601#157024, @wraitii wrote:

really hard to destroy.

(Without siege, like pretty much any structure.)

In D3599#156997, @borg- wrote:

I haven't played with mauryans or against, but I can't say if I will be op or not, although I'm almost sure not.

If possible, I'd like you to check. Having to build ele stables is a fair drawback, but they are _strong_ units.

Conceptually, I'd rather agree with this (maybe even suggest lowering territory radius a bit more all over). I think expanding is not _so_ needed right now on some maps, because a city-phase CC will give a lot of terrain. If there are additional mines in the territory, you're pretty much good to go.

In D3563#156369, @borg- wrote:

Any opnion @Nescio ?

D3602

I would like the opinion of @ValihrAnt and @Feldfeld

I haven't played with mauryans or against, but I can't say if I will be op or not, although I'm almost sure not. However, the current health and attack are bad. The attack must be the same as other archers and the health must be greater than the cavalry, so this patch seems good to me.
The cost I would keep as is or 150 food 100 wood.

Foundations with different values don't really make sense. The patch does not change the balance and introduces a pattern. I don't see anything negative.

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

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

yes I know :) just players who used to set up Normal could be confused why their map is smaller as used to be :)

• don't copy and paste .json, as spotted by @wraitii

It is small, though it's still an improvement over the current situation.

To be clear, the default hasn't changed, nor have any maps sizes; the only change is that their name strings are corrected.

if he did what I think, no
that's another diff I have in mind to fix checking mods compatibility on connecting to server because now direct connection ignores that so I could add flag for gui mods there

Also won't this break @nani's autociv workaround for undetectable mods?

Also #6063:

function formatNumber(amount)
{
	let result = amount;
	if (amount > 1000000)
		result = Math.floor(amount / 1000000) + translateWithContext("symbol to identify a million", "M");
	else if (amount > 10000)
		result = Math.floor(amount / 1000) + translateWithContext("symbol to identify a thousand", "k");
	return result;
}

Maybe change default map size for random maps to "Medium" then?

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

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

Fix JSON

It is kind of a very small improvement when the name on the map is still generic.

guess this is reason of comments that a24 had small maps?

where one player can be basically entirely surrounded by mountains except for a minor passage near the border, things like that

It is in my plans to add a constraint so that the flood fill passage can't be near the border because indeed that can hurt gameplay.
I will also try to guarantee bigger passages but I don't know to which extent I can go without making the loading time too long.

The texts can be improved a bit (e.g. periods at end of sentences), I'll look into that later (also pinging @Nescio for that).

The generation has some fairly bad edge cases, where one player can be basically entirely surrounded by mountains except for a minor passage near the border, things like that. You can also run into maps where some bit is just inaccessible because mountain ranges enclose it.

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

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

Minor cleanup

Fixed small bug with double-named subject and revised layout to better match the manual

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

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

Update UnitAI.

Works for me (ArchLinux with rust 1.50)

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

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

Fix error in PetraAI nomad.

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

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

As discussed with @wraitii the other day (I don't remember what day it was) we might actually just want to have a FSM state for upgrading.

Actually functional™

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

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

Rebased.

Is it intended that PetraAI plays as the enemy in the tutorial?

need way how to recover without editing config again

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

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

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

change to unordered_maps

various changes and improvements to logic

Rebased

Woodcutting behavior is sometimes "weird".

In D3585#156768, @Stan wrote:

Looks alright, shouldn't you ignore the test.cpp files too? I remember someone mentioning it.

Looks alright, shouldn't you ignore the test.cpp files too? I remember someone mentioning it.

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

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

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

change to unordered_maps

command support
report to gui when cant set mods
some code movement

but reset which settings
should there be some file within release to say which needs to be reset ?
what about mods editing user.cfg settings in previous release, should these changes carry on?

user needs to do all settings again with new version

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

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

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

const, renaming, cleaning