this makes it possible to add eyecandy neutral buildings like mercenary camps?

you shouldn't leave the text floating. add a background. I posted an example on the forum.

For some reason I feel less impressive and less real than the previous one.

In rP26473#56277, @Freagarach wrote:

@Lionkanzen When the message says: Committed (rP### in the URL), it means that the patch is in SVN already.
(A differential revision has reviewers, a summary and a test plan (and D#### in the name).)

Got it.

I am curious to see this. could you share it on the forum?

In my cellphone some things look darker.
Composition is ok.

I add to Kate to this revision, she has a problem with this.

Why are you going to delete the princess tent?

Is there any mod where you have this test?
How does it work against elephant spam?

I don't see any problem.

I dont see any problem. good change for early.

Go ahead . Looks reasonably. I'm not familiar with this unit. Even im not sure how works in AoE 3.

Look fine.

In D2229#118989, @Nescio wrote:

I think I would still prefer a straightforward implementation like so:

<Armour>
  <Damage>
    ...
  </Damage>
</Armour>

As do I. I can't say I fully understand this patch or its purpose, though.

I don't agree, a Elephant hero same a mauryan healer?

I tested a lot.

Cavalry melee must counter siege ram. Then spearman counter the cavalry.

In D2686#118403, @borg- wrote:

Ok, i agree with 1500 stone.

In D2816#120241, @Feldfeld wrote:

I leave this here for now, but one possible consequence of this rebalance is that rams (maybe elephants) could need a buff (perhaps better techs to make them more resistant).

In D2504#120125, @Feldfeld wrote:

I agree that these buildings having a territory root is unnatural.
The iberian monument is good thanks to its aura, the Ashoka pillar is unused in multiplayer, and I don't know what the Rome arch is. By the way I didn't even know that these buildings had a territory root. It isn't documented in tooltip I think and I don't know of online players that build them for that reason.

disagree with this.

disagree. like elexis.

Is fine.

Palisades needs more love. Some upgrades and special tech , i love cover neutral pass with those. Are very useful in open map. And works well to make some siege to protect siege engines.

Works fine, it could be nice test in multiplayer. But is great for turtling game style.

In D2493#108840, @ValihrAnt wrote:

I'd be very happy if attacking siege engines was the default, but in my opinion, capturing ranged siege engines isn't too bad. It already happens very rarely as players tend to have those things near their army, so capturing them only really happens if a player somehow forgets the siege weapon in some area or the siege engine wasn't brought back in time after an enemy gains a big army lead. Even in such cases, players have plenty of time to delete the siege engine as capturing takes a while.

If we garrison units inside, it should increase the speed of the battering ram.

ok I will test this.

Yes, that proposed all look like single thing.

img=https://k60.kn3.net/1/6/6/7/3/5/93D.png
check this.

Yes, and I'm the graphical artist.

I can search color schemes, rainbow are over saturated color contrast is based in the opposite of a color.
If your have dark color you must use light colors no necessary over saturated as you are using here.
You can use light gray almost white, a lighter red but not so saturated. Same with yellow or use some color like this.

Change blue with cyan, that blue don't makes enogh contrast.
Try use same scheme from the game or websites.

I think the flashing objects should be another task