https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/27124

https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/27125

Ah yes, the parent template.

Make sure to capitalize all words in genericName. :)

Should the minimap have its own sprite.xml file for clarity?

Alpha 27?

No need to delete the Libraries completely. Just rename them to library_special or something. :)

*cavalry

In D4697#202056, @marder wrote:

thx for the acceptance, but I still think this part of the summary has to be done to complete the change:
Building stats (health & capture points) will probably need to be adjusted to accommodate this.

In D840#40885, @wraitii wrote:

@temple I think you need to reduce the scope of this patch, it will never get committed in its current incarnation imo.

Crazy me would prefer an even further vision range reduction, which would make scouting more intense and maps feel larger (without needing to increase their actual size). Or perhaps keep the 80 range and adjust the chase range in UnitAI.js

I like this solution, as I tried the {civ} method previously in the CC template and it didn't work, but now it does. :)

Could Fanatics be a lot like Fenris Wolves in Age of Mythology? Individually weak, but with an aura that boosts fellow Fanatics around them? A small stackable speed and attack boost. Just a suggestion.

rP26997

ERROR: Error in timer on entity 2409, IID105, function TimerHandler: TypeError: Engine.QueryInterface(...) is null UnitAI.prototype.RespondToTargetedEntities@simulation/components/UnitAI.js:5048:17 UnitAI.prototype.AttackEntitiesByPreference@simulation/components/UnitAI_DE.js:89:14 UnitAI.prototype.FindNewTargets@simulation/components/UnitAI.js:5994:14 Timer@simulation/components/UnitAI.js:1677:14 FSM.prototype.ProcessMessage@globalscripts/FSM.js:265:17 UnitAI.prototype.TimerHandler@simulation/components/UnitAI.js:4229:15 Timer.prototype.OnUpdate@simulation/components/Timer.js:139:44

Missing quite a few minus signs in the tooltips?

In D4676#199132, @chrstgtr wrote:

Maybe this is too simple, but why don’t we just switch default unit behavior to destroy instead of capture and adjust health and control metrics to reflect how we want them? So for example,make the health points for non-military buildings (e.g. houses and markets) low so that they can be quickly destroyed. We could also do the opposite with military buildings that we want to buff (e.g. towers) where we increase capture points a bunch. That way the health and capture metrics are easily viewable/understandable by the player, it keeps all current strategies (I.e. capturing a temple in enemy territory to get a footing, border skirmishes to gain enemy buildings, sneaks cc captures, etc) , and gets rid of annoying capture delete mechanic meta that currently exists. It also shifts the game to fighting-based the way that wraitii wants and any deviation from that is an intentional Strategy move. It seems like it an all around win.

I wonder if that's a part of the reporting statistics, or can be added.

I agree with this. The currently bloated list of maps gives the illusion of choice, when people actually only tend to choose a dozen or less. Cutting the fat, as they say, increases the overall quality of what remains. It also gives us a smaller workset as we endeavor to improve the maps that remain.

The golden laurel looks really nice. It would be nice to allow for civ specific graphics for mods. The laurel is super cool though.

Looks neat and works as advertised. Testing it in Atlas though, the Catapult doesn't die when the ship does.

Should go ahead and place all special buildings into the Builder mixin so they call can be placed strategically.

In D4622#196482, @Stan wrote:

I asked @Samulis for another sound :)

In D4537#196617, @LetswaveaBook wrote:

However I feel it could be improved if the marines had a special bonus when garrisoned in ships instead of being generic swordsman champions.

Those corpses are still getting chopped up though. ;)

The problem with the cursor in 4K seems to be a rendering issue rather than a texture issue. Perhaps someone else can verify?

I'm not sure if "Mangonel" is a Chinese word. Seems more like it should be the GenericName instead of "Trebuchet."

I could support moving the Market to P1 for these 3 civs. But that's not a team bonus, that's a civ bonus. This diff is meant to address their team bonuses. :) I do agree also that trading bonuses for a team bonus seems kinda mediocre, but I wasn't trying to reinvent the wheel with this diff, just address some issues with differentiation and effectiveness.

In D4604#195911, @marder wrote:

Adjacent but of topic question: what happened to that infinite resources trade bug?

In D4604#195915, @Freagarach wrote:

Is this the forum thread you meant? https://wildfiregames.com/forum/topic/75691-trader-bonuses-international-vs-landsea-traders/