Might be worth checking if there are any tips referencing that as well.

Not in any gui/text/tips/* file.

Update worker elephant tooltip (cf. D2578).

Updated because of rP23559/D2659.

@Feldfeld, any opinions on this?

forgot maur gate loot

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)

This patch is practically superseded by D2659/rP23559 (thanks, Angen).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.

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

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.

(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, 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.

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:

cf. rP22977

Also it would not be shown in structure tree and right clicking to trainable unit. (Side note, I think you need to put that technology somewhere to work if I am not mistaken)

Actually it works:

Thank you!

the chariot currently cannot be trained, and will be up to the balancers to include or not.

D2683

Without this patch:

• Conquest games are won by destroying all enemy structures and units
• Conquest Structures games are won by destroying all enemy structures; units are ignored
• Conquest Units games are won by destroying all enemy units; structures are ignored

Expected behaviour with this patch:

• Conquest and Conquest Structures games: foundations are ignored
• Conquest Units and non-Conquest games: unchanged

That should be easy to verify by running some test games.

maur_wall_gate.xml, pers_stable.xml

Thanks. D2222 is a similar patch for the {civ}.json data files.

Thanks for reviewing this, I appreciate it!
As for gates, the <Cost> component determines how expensive it is to repair the structure, and loot is 20% of the cost. The cost is indeed lower than building a long segment and upgrading it to a gate, but I think that's justifiable and the lesser evil.
Likewise, building a village tower and upgrading it to a town tower is more expensive than waiting and building a town tower directly.

Remaining pers_stable

Oops, missed that one, will correct, thanks for pointing that out!

The new patch looks to work fine, just tested it.

No errors, warnings, or unexpected AI behaviour? Could you describe what you tested and how exactly? Also maybe update this patch's summary and test plan.
At the very least one should verify it works as intended on:

• Conquest games
• Conquest Units games
• Conquest Structures games
• non-Conquest games

As I wrote earlier, I expect this to work, but didn't test it myself.

Try the patch as is (arc patch D2674).
The only unrelated change is I added full stops at the end of the comments in the xml file, but that doesn't make any difference.

Try this instead, I think it should work, but haven't tested.
@nephele, please take back (commandeer) this patch.

This is bad. The warning is there for a reason: it is meaningful and helpful. It should be kept, not removed. Instead, find a way to make an exception for foundations.

Great idea, thanks!

This patch will currently trigger a warning I will adress in my next diff.

It can only be committed if it works without errors, warnings, or problems for the AI (Petra).

Technically isn't a siege tower a "structure"?

It is an object constructed from several parts, so yes, that means it qualifies as structure, and it has a roof and walls, so it qualifies as a building too.
However, in 0 A.D. all siege entities are considered to be units (inherit from template_unit.xml, have the “Unit” class, and can move), not structures (inherit from template_structures.xml, have the “Structure” class, and can't move).
Moreover, having most siege actors in the units folder (e.g. Roman ram) but some in the structures folder (e.g. Persian ram) is both inconsistent and confusing.

only brit now

No. That was the case in the initial version, but not anymore (patch was updated on 8 March): {civ}_champion_chariot.xml can be recruited at maur and sele fortresses, but not {civ}_chariot.xml.

(pers_chariot.xml is untrainable, hence this patch does not affect gameplay balance. Horse archer actors are moved to the persians folder, similar to D2636.)

food, wood, stone, metal

@elexis, it would be great if you could continue your review of this patch at some point. Spaces etc. in map file names still cause problems with Vulcan when uploading patches to phabricator.

@Stan?

@borg-, @Feldfeld, @Stockfish0ad, @ValihrAnt, any opinions on this?

@Angen?

@Angen?

@borg-, @Feldfeld, @Stockfish0ad, @ValihrAnt, any opinions on this?

@borg-, @Feldfeld, @Stockfish0ad, @ValihrAnt, any opinions on this?

Ideally all hero auras ought to be more or less equally good.
Maybe Hannibal and Vercingetorix should get a shorter range (e.g. 30, like Scipio), a lower bonus (e.g. 10%), some other penalty (e.g. -1 armour), or an entirely different aura altogether.
That could be included here or done in a separate patch.
There might some other auras that could use tweaking; I didn't check them all. When proposing this patch, I believe I was mostly looking at the global auras.

150

Great! There are eight different bear species, each with a slightly different size, shape, and behaviour:

Stable, Elephant Stable, Kennel?

I feel that the +20% damage heroes with local are better anyway so making the +1 armor local makes it feel pretty weak for me.

Whilst +20% attack damage is indeed better than +1 armour, what matters is the classes it affects and the area it works on. To keep things balanced there is a trade-off.
Caratacos affects soldiers and siege engines, Maximus humans (i.e. soldiers, heroes, and support units) and structures. Furthermore, a radius of 60 means an area 4× as large as a radius of 30, 2.25× as large as radius of 40, and 1.78× as large as a radius of 45.
For comparison:

• Scipio gives soldiers and siege engines +20% attack damage, but only within a radius of 30.
• Seleucus grants +20% attack damage within a radius of 60, but affect only Champion Elephants.
• Boudica grants Champions +20% attack damage within a radius of 40.

On a side note, antiochus is fine (compared to his counterpart, that one persian hero that gives attack to cavalry) because it allows to micro away the cavalry to save them before they die and heal them which helps them get promoted

Exactly! Cyrus (Cavalry +20% attack damage within a radius of 45) and Antiochus (Cavalry +2 armour within a radius of 45) are counterparts and don't need changing.

Celts have a 20% discount on structure time, which is equivalent to a 25% increase in worker build rate.
Worker Elephants are primarily mobile resource dropsites, though.

Separately, could you create a donkey trader for Athens and Sparta? Southern Greece is rather mountaineous, horses were scarce, and donkeys (and mules!) were used extensively.
Macedon and Seleucids can keep the horse-and-cart trader.