Remove changes from another diff

Given that this only changes the Hero elephant stats now, I think it's rather safe to commit

@Nescio, if you want to command this patch it’s all yours.
It can be a great addition to D2494.

Some icons I have already updated in other patches D3356 D3357.

Rebase.
I will not be making changes to the ranged cavalry like the previous patch.
I don't know how the changes in formation, rotation, etc, will change gameplay, so I will make a totally safe patch, only with changes that I am sure will be better.

Build is green

@Nescio soldier_resistance_hack_02 should cost food instead of wood.

+40% build time.

Keep teatry e comercial gain 1/2 by @Nescio.

No changes in description.

Changes requested by @Nescio
I kept health at +50%, with 75% it has 2100 health, more than a barracks or temple that are much bigger, 1800 health seems fair.

In rP24610#47522, @Angen wrote:

does it fix #5909 ?

is it fixing #5348 or just improving situation ?

does it fix #5909 ?

Healer costs 250 food. Carnyx has a strong aura and has the power of a champion, I think the value I proposed is fair. 100/150 is bassically same cost of normal champion.

Could finally reproduce with forced hashes (that should be an option)

I do somewhat agree that build restrictions might be better served by a center-to-center distance calculation. Needs some thinking for A25.

Same diagnostic + tested to work -> merge.

Build is green

Build is green

Use MovableCellObject<JSObject*>, since that appears to work & per moz devs it should be equivalent.

the "D" is the most consistent between citizen and champions.
To increase attack for ranged soldiers a health nerf or armor is required. Option D does this.

Now I'm confused. The current situation for ranged soldiers is:

        damage , spread ; resistance
basic   : 1    , 3      ; 1
advanced: 1    , 2.7    ; 2
elite   : 1    , 2.43   ; 3
champion: 2    , 1      ; 5
hero    : 4    , 0.5    ; 8

Now let's list a few competing suggestions:
(A) Initial patch, give advanced and elite +20% attack damage each, without spread improvements; leave champions and heroes unchanged:

        damage , spread ; resistance
basic   : 1    , 3      ; 1
advanced: 1.2  , 3      ; 2
elite   : 1.44 , 3      ; 3
champion: 2    , 1      ; 5
hero    : 4    , 0.5    ; 8

(B) Give advanced and elite +20% attack damage each, without spread improvements, but remove their resistance increases:

        damage , spread ; resistance
basic   : 1    , 3      ; 1
advanced: 1.2  , 3      ; 1
elite   : 1.44 , 3      ; 1
champion: 2    , 1      ; 3
hero    : 4    , 0.5    ; 6

(C) Give advanced and elite +10% attack damage and −20% spread each, weaken champions and heroes accordingly:

        damage , spread ; resistance
basic   : 1    , 3      ; 1
advanced: 1.1  , 2.4    ; 2
elite   : 1.21 , 1.92   ; 3
champion: 1.5  , 1      ; 5
hero    : 2    , 0.6    ; 8

(D) Give advanced and elite +15% attack damage and −25% spread each, remove resistance increases, and weaken champions and heroes accordingly:

        damage , spread ; resistance
basic   : 1    , 3      ; 1
advanced: 1.15 , 2.25   ; 1
elite   : 1.32 , 1.6875 ; 1
champion: 1.75 , 1      ; 3
hero    : 2.66 , 0.4    ; 6

(E) Something else.
I'd highly appreciate feedback from @ValihrAnt, @wraitii, and others as well.

First, thanks for that patch.
Some players asked me to return elephants to Persians. That said, I think it is correct that you will be trained in the right place for that. Just like stables (cavalry), arsenal have been added to this alpha, it's just for elephant stables too.
This makes the civilizations that train elephants more similar to the Mauryans but different from everything else, which for me is plausible.

Yes, I like that idea, with that the 20% attack increase can be balanced. Armor of champions ranged must also be changed.

I'm not sure I like the removal of the reveal shore, to me it seems a fun addition. <- Maybe another team member disagrees with me here.
I dislike the removal of the colony from the metropolis tech also, because that just seems to be a good part of what its supposed to do.

Those two things could be split off.

I wanted to wait after release.

@Freagarach, if you have time, could you review this? It's small and doesn't affect gameplay balance (and includes map files).

Removing the wood cost is fine by me, but 250 food seems rather excessive. How about 100 food and 150 metal instead? Or perhaps 100 food and 200 metal? (How much is the aura worth to you?)

I thought about removing wood cost and adding more food and metal, like 250 food and 100 metal.

@borg-, how much should this unit cost?

It's pending on whether it's acceptable to lower ranged champion and hero attack damage; see earlier post.

News?

In D3357#149337, @Nescio wrote:

I can agree to keep two techs for commercial gain, but I see no reason to keep tech for international gain, it seems to me repeated.

It's fundamentally different. If you're only trading with yourself, it won't help you at all (which is my it is so cheap), but if you have allies, both you and them benefit. It may be a bit more difficult to understand, but it encourages cooperation, therefore I'd really like it to stay.

D3287/rP24604 has been committed today, from which heroes still benefit, confirming for me the need to delete this hero-only technology.

I could also suggest to have I II III on tech icons if they feel identical?

Please do that for the gather technologies!

I can agree to keep two techs for commercial gain, but I see no reason to keep tech for international gain, it seems to me repeated.

It's fundamentally different. If you're only trading with yourself, it won't help you at all (which is my it is so cheap), but if you have allies, both you and them benefit. It may be a bit more difficult to understand, but it encourages cooperation, therefore I'd really like it to stay.

I could also suggest to have I II III on tech icons if they feel identical?

I can agree to keep two techs for commercial gain, but I see no reason to keep tech for international gain, it seems to me repeated. my intention is to clean and add new technologies soon.
the same will apply to temple technologies.

For the greater good

I already forgot that ^^ I actually thought that was in already ;)

Purge 0 lines?

D3342 (I like consistency.)

Build is green

Purge 0 lines?

• let bolt-shooters keep a linear splash, because the removal was deemed too controversial
• give fireship and fireraiser only fire damage, instead of a combination of hack, pierce, and crush, per @Freagarach
• raise fireship minimum range because of its footprint size

Back to this patch. Civilization bonuses hidden in templates:

• cart market and dock
• cart merchant ship
• pers trader
• iber tower
• kush, pers, rome ram
• rome bolt-shooter and stone-thower
• spart female citizen

and without D2950 a number of population bonuses. Anything else?
The first three are particularly important, since trade gain and international bonus increases won't show up in the structure tree or cursor pop-ups. As for the rest, I think it's an improvement highlighting them by inclusion in the civ pages, but I'm unsure it's strictly necessary. Opinions?

With linear I'd be okay. Not completely fond of it but enough for it to be committed.

I wouldn't block anymore yeah.

To summarize, @badosu, @borg-, @wraitii, and I are in favour of this patch, but I believe @Angen, @Freagarach, @Stan are against.
While I strongly believe removing linear splash from bolt-shooters is a real improvement, if that's the only thing blocking this, how about leaving it out then? I'd rather see most of it committed than nothing at all; artillery is simply not very effective right now.
Also, D2493?

What's wrong with having two trade gain technologies? The storehouse technologies are fine, aren't they?
If some market has to go, I'd say deprecate trade_convoys_speed. I don't really care about trade_convoys_armor either.
And if you want to simply have fewer similar technologies, have a look at the healer technologies at the temple.

How about move the commercial gain tech to town and keep the international gain techonology superseding commercial gain for city phase?

In rP24332#47472, @wraitii wrote:

That's the windows 'stub' lib for rust code. I believe we need that for compilation on Windows?

Yeah I'm too short on text sometimes ^^'

Let's rephrase the descriptions then.
The commit message is quite short, the patch summary gives a more detailed reasoning.

Since they are conceptually more policical techs than commercial.

Description of these techs says othervise.

Cartography

By means of trading and travelling people explored beyond the boundaries of their lands and drew maps of it in order to share and memorize their discoveries.

This has nothing to do with politic, it says trading and traveling and drawing maps.

Diaspora

The extension of trade leads to the permanent establishment of storekeepers and their families in foreign countries, allowing them to exploit the wealth of these countries.

How is this not commercial.

Might be relevant https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/25669-lighthouse-bonuseffect/?tab=comments#comment-372794