• and lighthouse a vision range of 200

Build has FAILED

• improve library aura a bit, per @borg-

Actually I really like the splash concept. However, it has several issues (see summary and earlier posts), hence this patch.
I'd welcome giving e.g. the fireraiser or dragon linear splash and perhaps the plane a circular splash (something for a future patch), but it simply doesn't work that well in practice for trainable entities, which is why I believe this change is a real improvement.

I would say the strongest argument in favour of linear splash damage is realism, since most likely Roman scorpio were used to pierce through several ranks of enemy troops.

Source, please? I suspect that was more the exception than the rule. (Also, several means more than two but not many.)

Just increase the percentage a little bit, no need to change how it works.

Maybe increase the range of the lighthouse a little more, like 210?

So I tested how much of a tiny map a lighthouse could reveal.

Since Hellenistic Metropolis is removed of library, what do you think about improving the aura a litle, or move to p2?

No, let's keep it in the city phase. As for the aura, I'm open to suggestions.

Since Hellenistic Metropolis is removed of library, what do you think about improving the aura a litle, or move to p2?

Build has FAILED

I agree with everything

Great!

but I don't think it's logical that "Hellenistic Metropolis" doubles health. Hellenic constructions have +10% health, so why does tech double the value? I don't know if this change should be made in this patch.

Yes, I fully agree with you, the technology seems far to strong. However, I would prefer to see it changed in a separate patch, partially because I'm unsure what would be appropiate values.

Maybe increase the range of the lighthouse a little more, like 210?

That would mean a 36% larger area than it currently has.

I agree with everything, but I don't think it's logical that "Hellenistic Metropolis" doubles health. Hellenic constructions have +10% health, so why does tech double the value? I don't know if this change should be made in this patch.
Maybe increase the range of the lighthouse a little more, like 210?

Assembly changes are just to make it easier to rebase, I just took your file +borg-'s comments

Seems the splash damage removal is very contentious for the bolt shooters. I'm not a fan on several grounds, technical outlined above, but I'll add that it's easily countered by putting units in 'skirmish' formations when walking.
It's also really hard to balance correctly, and the unit will tend to be either useless or overpowered, which isn't great.
I would say the strongest argument in favour of linear splash damage is realism, since most likely Roman scorpio were used to pierce through several ranks of enemy troops. But our units don't really fight in formation, and walking in formation is also somewhat defeated by the skirmish formation.
Overall, I think it's better for gameplay if those units are treated as snipers than as mass-control, both being, I think, rather equally viable usage in ancient times.

I would like to see the three infantry champions trained on assembly and removal of unlock tech, but for this it must be a p2 building.

Why? It is a hall for princes, so it needs some blingbling ;)

Standard cost for gaul buildings.

In D3345#148814, @Nescio wrote:

And what values would you recommend for the fireraiser's <xp> and health?

And what values would you recommend for the fireraiser's <xp> and health?

Build has FAILED

By the way, the siege tower is quite costly (500 wood, 300 metal, 40 seconds); what do you think of giving it a bit more health (e.g. 500→600)?

No, it is preferable to decrease cost.

Will it make a profileable difference?

first, thank you for feedback :)

In D3287#148781, @Nescio wrote:

Elephants are very large animals, I'm not sure how giving them a shield would work. Anyway, that's just nitpicking, not a major objection against this patch.

It could be argued that this applies to the elephant's rider, which is also somewhat vulnerable. I think unless we have a strong reason not to include them (such as specific techs for elephants), it's probably better to.

Rebased. Planning to merge still as the current behaviour can look buggy, even if it's not really problematic.

Build has FAILED

A bit more elaborate fix, though still a tad ugly.

It was already used by another technology available at the same structure.

Icons should be good now, this needs a rebase.

Just for the record @borg- @Nescio what was wrong with the original icon?

No hard feelings. We all make mistakes, especially under pressure. As long as we can point them out to eachother respectfully it's good :) (For me at least.)

check i did not break something else

Differential revision: D2856.

Build has FAILED

Elephants are very large animals, I'm not sure how giving them a shield would work. Anyway, that's just nitpicking, not a major objection against this patch.
The technology description strings need to be corrected, though.

Fix condition merging

Technology tooltips were checked and corrected in D3338/rP24564, so you should rebase this and focus on doing the armour→resistance correction in aura descriptions.

Build is green

I don't see any major problems. like any other champion, it seems fair to me to be affected by techs.

The fireraiser also needs health and xp values.
By the way, the siege tower is quite costly (500 wood, 300 metal, 40 seconds); what do you think of giving it a bit more health (e.g. 500→600)?
And perhaps ram metal cost can be lowered a bit (e.g. 200→150)? A tower costs only 100 wood + 100 metal.

Build has FAILED

Maybe one thing I would like to see -> your call @Nescio , is to add tooltips saying "good vs Buildings" / "good vs Units" ? Maybe too obvious?

If that's done for these two, it should also be done for other units and structures. I vaguely recall having had this discussion perhaps two years ago, but I forgot where and with whom. My main objection is that displaying more text in tooltips in game makes it less likely people will read everything, and also risks drowning more important information.
In my opinion loading screen tips are a better place for discussing the functions of structures and unit types; I'd say it's outside the scope of this patch, though.

Build has FAILED

Rebased for commit.

Build has FAILED

To be honest, I would like to remove linear splash damage. It's complex to implement (particularly in JS), gives no obvious feedback to the user graphically, and it's kind of broken (the ranges are very approximate right now). For stuff like bolt shooters, we should instead let the projectile continue its course and hit units along the way.
Of course, that would require a few other changes in general.

300 wood, 150 metal 30 secs?

Committed as rP24589 by @Freagarach.

Build has FAILED

Elephants don't benefit from resistance technologies currently, but will with this patch. Is that good or bad?

Rebase, add missing includes/reorder them { on new line

Well, I'm glad someone looks critically at the actual modifications! I noticed I'm making quite a few mistakes lately, probably the result of writing many patches in quick succession. Rushing things is risky, I know.

• drop metal cost, per @borg-

Maybe something like 50%?

That would mean 200 for the ram and 250 for the siege tower. Fine by me, but in keep in mind that's enough for a basic soldier to promote to elite rank.

fireraise appears on the "survival" map, so it seems interesting to include.

It needs a cost then (resources and time). Any recommendations?

Let's do the assembly changes in D3344, not here.

Maybe something like 50%?
fireraise appears on the "survival" map, so it seems interesting to include.

This fixes the scaling, per https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/28249-trunk23678-atlas-editor-the-map-simulation-displayed-at-14-bottom-left-corner-of-its-canvas-osx/?tab=comments#comment-398428 .

Shouldn't the xp loot of ram and siege_tower be bigger since in theory you need fight with the soldiers inside?

Perhaps. I assume <xp> depends on how dangerous an unit is, e.g. ranged soldiers are much easier to kill than melee soldiers, but have the same <xp>, presumably because their long attack range makes them more effective when massed; the same applies to artillery.
I have no objections to giving rams and siege towers more <xp>, but it shouldn't be 100% of health. What value would you recommend for them?

Fireraiser should be included?

The fireraiser doesn't have a cost, so I don't think giving it a loot is appropiate.

@Imarok's finding can probably be fixed by not showing techs from another civ.

@vladislavbelov any plans to commit this improvement?

Build is green

Angen's note.

Build is green

Slight tweak.
I think this works well enough for A24

Build is green

Address comments.

Build is green

In D3340#148586, @Stan wrote:

Should h files get copyright headers?

I'm not sure, shaders don't have copyright headers.

In D2674#118627, @Stan wrote:

arc diff --update a diff you don't own :)

Or change the URL when updating via the web interface.