Patch needs rebased after https://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/24001

The only thing I don't like about this patch is that the player name ribbon has been reduced in height, and hence the civ icon background is not visible. That was the only small bit of civ specific UI work in the whole game. Other than that, this patch works wonderfully and should be committed.

Palisades could go into a structures/common folder, at least until palisade models can be created on a per civ basis (if ever; largely a palisade is a palisade, not much culturally happening there, so I imagine the Palisades objects being common amonfg multiple civs for quite a while longer).

If you make women build everything, even military buildings and fortresses and stuff, then you should go the DE route and change "Female Citizens" to just Citizens (male and female) using the phenotype system.

In D2863#122792, @borg- wrote:

I would keep thureophoros for athen and thorakites for sparta and cloak for mace.

One type unit per civ.

I agree with this change. No problem with it.

I agree for the most part. I've always hated the "Persian Hall" as a buildable structure.

Sounds fine to me.

Interesting diff. What kind of gameplay feature do you envision supporting?

Is there another differential for the Seleucid Cavalry Javelinist? It's also a Persian unit.

Commit? lol

Looks good in-game. Great job.

Anything in particular blocking this one?

This commit was to implement a design decision made long ago to make the Uffington White Horse the Briton wonder. Any discussion here should be about technical issues.

The selection problem is fixed, but there's a related problem I did not notice until now. When trying to task a unit to capture/attack an enemy building in the FOW:

I don't know anything about tests, but I applied the diff and can confirm it stops the errors.

I guess allowing modifications to add new bonuses is maybe out of scope / not doable yet?

I'm not sure, but I don't think this was fixed. Units still randomly enter run mode even after the autobuild.

Not sure if related, but I got this in the game uploading loading a map:

I suppose you should go all the way and rename any "mauryans" folders too.

athen_champion_infantry
athen_infantry_spearman_b
mace_champion_infantry_a
pers_kardakes_hoplite
spart_champion_infantry_spear
spart_infantry_spearman_b
thebes_sacred_band_hoplitai

In D889#35586, @Nescio wrote:

Update: a squircle is too difficult for me to create, but I could do a rounded rectangle:

Please have a critical look at the corners. As you can see it has the same issue as the elongated circle. I would recommend against it, but if you insist, I could add this shape as well.

Hi, sorry. This is what I mean when I say "lozenge":

As for the other shapes, they may be useful in the future. Honestly, I think a selection of rectangles for mechanical units would be nice, specifically siege, perhaps lozenge shaped, rectangles with rounded corners.

Tried the patch. The healer's changed selection is nice. It works because it is a totally different class of unit from the rest, so should stand out from the rest as well. Looked good. Approved. Also, the b/a/e chevrons worked as promised after the filename change.

This may need fixed since the last changes moved a lot of GUI files around.

Eh, so you're mixing the audio flavor of the civs, instead of keeping them distinct? That's what you're doing, essentially.

In D705#28169, @mimo wrote:

Can you check again with the new version? i did some tests, and the ai trained ships at the shipyard. Maybe something which was fixed with the latest changes in the patch.

Tested it on a Cycladic Archipelago skirmish map. AI does indeed build a Shipyard. Nice.

In D623#25916, @elexis wrote:

In D623#25910, @wowgetoffyourcellphone wrote:

Does it need to be player color? Why not just white or gray, currently not any player color? I agree the blue line is kind of an odd choice.

Why not? Did you try it? It looks nice and expected IMO

delenda est, which annoyingly has a copy of the Player component for any reason

Does it need to be player color? Why not just white or gray, currently not any player color? I agree the blue line is kind of an odd choice.

IMHO, for gather commands you should see the target briefly flash white for visual verification. Same with attack command, maybe flash white, maybe flash red? Anyway, seems like it should be a different thing from this arrow indicator.

In D517#23832, @s0600204 wrote:

So, what I'd like to suggest is that if you "accept" this revision, I can then commit it so as to get the changes into vanilla-0ad. That would mean that you could remove the copy of globalscripts/Templates.js from your mod (one less file for you to have to track changes to...).

Then, once D295 is also reviewed, accepted and committed (because I think the changes that will need to be made will be easier and cleaner after that), I can revisit the upgrades-with-production-queues problem and find a way to display them (and properly). Okay?

Oh thank you. I forgot it was in globalscripts. I thought it was in the components folder and when I saw it wasn't there, I thought I had removed it. I removed the offending file and reapplied the patch.

Hi, I tried these files and I don't see the Upgrade units being displayed in the Trainer bar. Is that the intention?

Tested it. Works great.

I definitely like this change!

May I suggest a different approach? Renaming the parent templates entirely, to be more logical?

Sorry, not sure how this would be more fun. It's micro heavy.

Works as advertised. I cannot comment on the code itself, but the end result gives the desired functionality as requested.

I think there are better way to upgrade Hypaspists to Silvershields, for instance use the Upgrade feature, and a tech unlocking this.