can it be done that only approved translations are pulled from transifex?

tests + one more relevant case

Since several svn changes in unitAi, I still can see broken behaviour when the same target can be chosen in infinite loop because stance is not taken into account. Think about hold ground and last reachable formation member just died, so even closest formation member exists, it will be refused to chase over and over again, mainly because that part done by state switch and no passing new attack order.

Changes are correct by code.
Removing some code changes needed for D1958, so that one is easier to review.

Thank you for patch :)

Thank you for patch :)

Fixed in rP23448

Classic StatusEffect applies.
StatusEffect with modifiers applies modifiers to target.
When effect has duration, it is removed after duration ends.
StatusEffect with interval deals damage correctly to target.
Tooltip with effect for attack is displayed correctly when hovering over attack details.
Tooltip with applied effect is displayed correctly when hovering over effect icon.

Changed code is good.
Number of builders is correctly updated when repaired entity is transformed.
Builders continue to repair/construct when target is renamed.

rebase

Thank you for patch.

rebase

some small things

maybe it would be worth to take a look how much time and res it would cost ptol to reach next phase compared to some civ with most expensive required buildings with taking time to gather needed resources into account.

Personally I think fauna shouldn't be visible in fog-of-war

agree

Those are wrong
source/lib/pch/pch_warnings.h:#if MSC_VERSION <= 140
source/lib/pch/pch_warnings.h:#if MSC_VERSION <= 140

It would be better to write new function SetBuilders and pass whole array at once.
Next advantage is that all builders would be added at once and there will be just one message send.

I am not sure that forcing to build corral is good idea, maybe add house. Player should have some freedom when it comes to choosing how he wants to gather food. This way that would mean wasted resources if player does not plan to train animals. (just my point of view)

Code changes are good and code works as expected.
Animal does not enter INDIVIDUAL state from GARRISON state.

In D1634#107361, @nani wrote:

In D1634#107351, @elexis wrote:

• What is a fert?

Nothing. Made up. I initially wanted to name it "King of the hill" but sounded too cheesy. An alternative would be to translate it to Latin or such. Google tells me "king of the hill" in Latin is "Rex Monte" which sounds OK.

Fixes bug reported as comment in ticket: https://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/5610#comment:2

I can see why that would be wanted for IID_Attack or IID_Heal but IID_Vision should be excluded from this.

+ rotation of entity needs to be fixed as pointed above

needs rebase

You missed one case, else should be good i ll test tonight.

workspace and premake script updates are correct
workaround explicitly for vs2013 removal is ok
(planed to accept earlier but kind of forgot, sry)

Ah, yes. Thank you for reporting that. Position of unit is invalidated so animation is not setup based on position until next rearrange. We should also check against renaming entities to ones which cannot keep this formation but that is another problem.

use idle animations

It would be good to add splash radius into tooltips, @Freagarach ping me if you want to do it here or in another diff.

phalanx
move
promote using dev overlay
wrong animation

Fixed in rP23358.

Needs idle variants of approaching animtions because units sometimes stops while walking due obstructions.

Patch looks good, it is removing one code duplicity, Damage -> Data is correct since return type is object with more information than damage values.
Idea itself adds option for techs and auras in mods to change radius of splash damage what is generally good.

comment cleanup

setting invalid animation to entity without bones. Failed to find use case for that one and logical reasoning. Do you know why that would be usefull?

@elexis your last concern was fixed in rP23269, can you confirm and remove it or do you have something else here?

@Freagarach is rP23268 fixing your concern ?