Will this be in A27 or A28?

The description is fine, I do not know whether engagement is good or not, maybe ask at the forum. @Freagarach you can also look at this.

@Freagarach I believe this could be committed as others expressed their agreements?

@real_tabasco_sauce @Freagarach since the attack was changed from capture for next alpha I believe this is needed since few people would prefer it to be changed easily, I know it can be through hotkeys but unfortunately not many players, especially new ones do not know it, or it is not obvious enough for them.

@real_tabasco_sauce @borg- what is your opinion on this, I think that it is nice and useful addition for casual players like me a lot of other games have smth similar.

Did you make a post on forums about this?

In D5048#214660, @vladislavbelov wrote:

In D5048#214646, @wraitii wrote:

We did

Do you have a particular commit to refer?

cc @Langbart

@Stan did you come to some conclusion about this?

I second the Nifas suggestion.

I also like this as visual feedback.

Hi, @Stan did you discuss this with @Itms?

@Itms it would be nice if you look at this big patch too since this feature is on the list for decades.

@trompetin17 will you look at this too?

@Freagarach what is your opinion here?

I still agree with this change that for new players it is actually better, what about the linter warnings?

I believe it is fine now let's try to wait for smb from the balancing team.

From names and descriptions, I believe they are now acceptable, but it is bad that { "value": "Cost/BuildTime", for classes such as ships and siege engines it is not called in code "Cost/ConstructionTime". For balancing numbers I do not play so often so I cannot comment other than it works for me but that is subjective.

Hi, many thanks for your patch, look at the inlines please, in general, we use American English according to this https://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/EnglishStyleGuide . Since I will then through Transifex translate this to other languages so that we have some cohesion.

needs to update years to 2023 now, @Stan @Freagarach care to review it again and maybe commit it to master?

Any update on this, it would be nice to have it in the upcoming release?

I would argue that the ambush mechanic is the core mechanic and thus would benefit 0ad and mods. @Freagarach @Stan what are your opinions here?

It is unfortunate but I believe @bb or @Freagarach are more knowledgeable about this.

from my point of view there are none. @Stan care to take a look?

The code seems understandable to me and I do not find any problems, what about the balancing that @LetswaveaBook said in previous comments would it be in a separate patch or will it be included here?

I like this very much to be added.
maybe later the logs could be used as trap for armies as eg. in RTS game Bannermen.

could you look at forum thread recently updated by comment from @Lionkanzen which I agree with?

any update on this? needs rebase

I agree with you.

LGTM

@Stan do you want this to be committed for A26 or A27 ?

any update?

any update on this?

I believe this is a nice change I agree with, please correct the inlines which others mentioned.

I already voted on the forum for the version with the image on the right.

I also believe this patch goes in the right direction and could be committed so it could be tried in the next RC release.

Thank you @borg- for making this. There might be some reduction in armour maybe for Neomadodes.

I am ok with this.

Many thanks for working on this and yeah screen size responsive layouts are considered, recently in alpha 26 there is GUI setting now available inside a game that was previously in user.cfg where it would have to be written manually but @marder said that he would need full CSS support for it.

Will there be an update on this, since it was committed for a minimap?

Is this something we want also for the engine? Well maybe for campaigns and cinematics but we have smth similar in Atlas.

@wraitii @vladislavbelov I believe you two can review this.

In D4659#198150, @Langbart wrote:

:) no matches found for Han Chinese, only the single word Chinese still shows up in some files e.g. Chinese Fire Ship Alight , should it be called Chinese ... or Han ... / Han Dynasty ... ?

❯ rg '(Han)*Chinese' -g='!l10n' -g='!translators.json' --stats
mods/public/simulation/templates/units/han/champion_chariot.xml
9:    <GenericName>Chinese War Chariot</GenericName>

mods/public/simulation/templates/special/players/han.xml
18:    <History>The Han dynasty (206 BC – AD 220) was the second imperial dynasty of China, preceded by the Qin dynasty (221–207 BC) and succeeded by the Three Kingdoms period (AD 220–280). It is considered a golden age in Chinese history, and China made significant progress in arts and sciences during the Han period. The core of the Han empire was around the Wei River, and the Han capital was Chang'an, very close to the Qin capital Xianyang (both are now part of Xi'an, Shaanxi).</History>

mods/public/simulation/data/technologies/crossbow_training.json
3:	"description": "The Chinese had a tradition of fine archery and a penchant for using massed crossbowmen in battle.",

mods/public/simulation/data/technologies/art_of_war.json
4:	"description": "This famous and most important work of the Seven Military Classics teaches Chinese commanders everything about planning battles, maintaining armies, and defeating one's enemies.",

mods/public/art/actors/structures/han/fishing_ship.xml
6:    <variant name="Chinese Fishing Ship">

mods/public/art/actors/structures/han/fireship_fire.xml
6:    <variant name="Chinese Fire Ship Alight">

mods/public/art/actors/structures/han/fireship.xml
6:    <variant name="Chinese Fire Ship">

mods/public/art/actors/structures/han/merchant_ship.xml
6:    <variant name="Chinese Merchant Ship">

mods/public/art/actors/structures/han/towership.xml
6:    <variant name="Chinese Towership">

mods/public/art/actors/structures/han/bireme.xml
6:    <variant name="Chinese Bireme">

mods/public/art/actors/structures/han/trireme.xml
6:    <variant name="Chinese Trireme">

mods/public/art/actors/props/structures/han/civic_center_leaves.xml
5:    <variant frequency="1" name="Chinese CC leaves">

mods/public/art/actors/props/structures/han/range_nature.xml
5:    <variant frequency="1" name="Chinese range nature">

mods/public/art/actors/props/structures/han/bixie_nature.xml
5:    <variant frequency="1" name="Chinese bixie nature">

mods/public/art/actors/props/structures/han/civic_center_nature.xml
5:    <variant frequency="1" name="Chinese CC plants">

mods/public/art/actors/props/structures/han/civic_center_bixie_gold.xml
5:    <variant frequency="1" name="Golden Chinese CC Bixie statues">

mods/public/art/actors/props/structures/han/civic_center_trunks.xml
5:    <variant frequency="1" name="Chinese CC trunks">

mods/public/art/actors/props/structures/han/civic_center_bixie.xml
5:    <variant frequency="1" name="Chinese CC Bixie statues">

mods/public/art/actors/props/structures/han/ministry_bixie.xml
5:    <variant frequency="1" name="Chinese CC Bixie statues">

mods/public/art/actors/props/structures/han/bixie.xml
5:    <variant frequency="1" name="Chinese Bixie">

mods/public/art/actors/props/structures/han/wonder_nature.xml
5:    <variant frequency="1" name="Chinese wonder nature">

21 matches
21 matched lines
21 files contained matches
26225 files searched
3008 bytes printed
1917303123 bytes searched
84.324502 seconds spent searching
10.780179 seconds

Langbart found some other not fixed matches, please fix those too. Thanks @Langbart

I agree, did you try to use grep?

It does make sense to me too.

It could be considered a bugfix which ads GUI part too but that depends if @Stan @Silier @Freagarach agree that it can be committed.

In D4621#196549, @Stan wrote:

Patch by: @elexis
Authored by: @Langbart

In D4621#196517, @Stan wrote:

Who should we credit here?

In D4619#196402, @Silier wrote:

Agree siege shouldn't probably be affected especially rams, but non soldiers shouldn't be excluded.

That said, resources that means not alive entities should be excluded from aura.

I second that. (also agree)

I agree with this one

I think this is a nice improvement to continue to work on this but it would be nice if we ask @vladislavbelov if the bad ARB cases could be improved or limited.

I believe this should go into A26 for debugging purposes.

accepted by @asterix

accepted by @asterix

I agree.

Since feature freeze is on Sunday this week, I do not see it as realistic to see it included in A26, unfortunately.

@marder @Stan could you look at it again?

In D4189#192764, @Stan wrote:

Would give more time for translators, though.

It would be nice if it can get before feature freeze A26.

I agree. @marder @Freagarach @wowgetoffyourcellphone can you test this as well?

In rP26462#56225, @Lionkanzen wrote:

Why are you going to delete the princess tent?

the problems and possible solutions are discussed here. https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/71578-feedbacks-from-a26-svn-tests/#comment-480686