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

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

Thanks for coming to the party, it is very much appreciated :)

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

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

Also include range-check in cmpHeal.

it hides cost change from templates

As is already the case for other technologies, both autoresearched (civbonuses/cart_walls.json) and ordinary (siege_cost_metal.json).

So it seems right to remove inconsistencies if there has been no intent or no valid intent behind having the inconsistencies while actually fostering inconsistencies that are sound historically, gameplay-design and balancing wise.

That I fully agree with. (Hence this patch.)

Perhaps the number is meant to make the wonder more useful than only to gain more population.
If the numbers are equal, then it can incentivize the player to just build a new temple in place instead of moving all the way to the wonder after a long fight.
Another consequences of accumulating power at the wonder is to give the defender at his very center of the city (wonder) a boost, shaping more of an final/end-battle at that place.

As I wrote earlier:

The higher the number, the easier the wonder is to defend (kill some nearby enemies, garrison your wounded soldiers before they're killed, wait some seconds to heal them, send them back to the fight, repeat).
[...] That said, I don't have strong feelings on the exact value chosen

The wonders that are temples have the epic healing aura and there were people putting thought into it (regardless of whether that was a perfect thought).

Actually all wonders are temple complexes, including those that currently lack that aura:

• Stonehenge (gaul) is a pre-Celtic religious site (from the Third Millennium)
• Cancho Roano (iber) is a Tartessian religious site
• The Great Stupa (maur) is a major Indian religious building
• The Hanging Gardens of Babylon (pers) an actor is clearly inspired by Mesopotamian ziggurats (the small room on top is the shrine that housed the statue of the deity)
• The Temple of the Pythian Apollo (sele) is based on a large sanctuary near the Syrian Tetrapolis (Antioch, Laodiceia, Apameia, Seleucia in Pieria), the core of the Seleucid Empire

In D2682#112675, @Nescio wrote:

Ideally heroes ought to be roughly equivalent.

I disagree here, heroes should be different, a "man-of-glass" hero which boosts some non-combat stuff should have way different stats than a tanky Leo, for example.
The player should have to carefully choose what hero fits their strategy, not just pick one randomly because it won't matter much anyway.

Great! I guess the rank changes can be split from this, although they are also compleat and correct.

Method:
I am a bit worried about the procedure of how the resulting patch is determined.

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

4 health per second is 4× as higher as garrisoning units in barracks after researching heal_barracks.json and 8× as high as idle organic units regenerating after researching health_regen_units.json, so I would say it's quite quick. The higher the number, the easier the wonder is to defend (kill some nearby enemies, garrison your wounded soldiers before they're killed, wait some seconds to heal them, send them back to the fight, repeat).
I chose 4 as a compromise between the six wonders that heal at 1 and the seven that heal at 8; actually 5 would be closer to the average. That said, I don't have strong feelings on the exact value chosen, so alternative opinions are welcome.
What matters to me is that wonders are equivalent; having one civ's significantly better than another is not really “fair”, especially in wonder victory games.

please split footprint changes from name changes
else I agree, footprints should not be smaller than entity

Isn't the idea of a wonder that it heals extremely quick (as the former tooltips describe)? Thus a rate of 8 would seem more appropriate?

@Feldfeld if you agree, you may accept the patch :)

(Nonetheless, I still hope a team member is willing to review and commit this patch, as well as D2502 (walls) and D2640 (traders). Though footprints are not terribly important, aesthetics matter.)

We generally avoid this kind of patches as it makes SVN blame harder.

rP22460 and https://code.wildfiregames.com/search/query/Q1SCB8AOz4Q0/#R
That said, I agree this patch is unimportant and do not object to it being abandoned; as I wrote in the summary:

I'm not sure it's necessary, but I suppose it doesn't do any harm.

True that.

True, there is a very small (neglible?) effect, but that affects all civs equally.
More importantly, footprint dimensions are determined by what looks good in game, not by balance considerations; otherwise any commit that introduces new actors would be a gameplay patch.

It will do, albeit only slightly.

Ah yes, I see it corrects for it ^^ (Templates.js globalscript L148.)

Actually I don't think adjusting footprints really distorts gameplay balance.

Well it matter for citizen-soldiers and champions.

The difference is you can't train more than one hero. Moreover, heroes have auras. Ideally heroes ought to be roughly equivalent; having one clearly better choice is rather undesirable; giving them all the same health could be a step in the right direction.

Is that in-game or at the structure tree from the main menu?

Accessed from the main menu, but it looks the same when opened from a game session. The tooltip in game also works: