Cap the instancing uniform at 64 following Optimus' testing.

Actually do something... Managed to break it yesterday.

In D2938#128124, @OptimusShepard wrote:

I always use a 200 units replay on sahydian buttes, camera will not moved or zoomed. What is GPU skinning? GSLS enabled.

gpuskinning is an option in default.cfg that you have to activate using the config file. You could try (de)/activating that

In D2938#128117, @OptimusShepard wrote:

I made some quick profiling. I noticed that the amount of draw calls is halfed. I also tested value 1 against 64. 64 is much faster. But compared to the non patched replay, there was a performance hit by ~10-20%.

Fixes a remaining issue with GPUs skinning.
Fixed the pgl stuff locally, so enabling it.

Fix GPU skinning. In general don't expect to really benefit from instancing, but I think this might actually instance trireme oars somewhat (at least testing locally), so that might be positive.

Switch back to 32 to get more pessimistic improvements (better for testing imo).
Also fix the slight ARB pessimisation.

Updated version with less terrible code, and also enables using "preferglsl=no" so you can compare with a baseline.
On my intel card, the GLSL version with instancing is always faster, while also being better looking.

In D2942#128015, @vladislavbelov wrote:

I don't see any strong reason to use std::unordered_map on the C++ side. It costs memory, some performance. The patch seems overhead, you might pass turrets through a list.

Extreme rebase (aka complete rewrite but the idea is there).

In D2229#127802, @wraitii wrote:

Mh, I don't really understand why you did this? Seems to me you could just query for Resistance in Attacking and do relevant stuff.

@Freagarach all yours

Implement unordered_map conversion.

I quite like how this looks.

In D2229#127797, @Freagarach wrote:

• Readded need for cmpResistance to be damaged (may be split).

Fixed and umlauted. Committing when lights are green.

This might want to compile.

Still working, overall still looks fine to me. I agree that it's better that way.

Done here:

• Show hotkey conflicts in the hotkey picker window (nothing on the main window - the data structures aren't good for it and I don't think it's too bad).
• Adds a simple text filter for hotkeys.
• Clean up the "left/right" meta keys situation.
• Include the hotkeys in the session menu.

TODO post SM52

TODO post SM52

Following discussion on IRC -> it seems we should instead delete the oldest corpse, as this looks rather ugly.

Update comment. Ready for commit.

Re-checked my maths, and I had a mistake for the min-range case.

@StefanBruens Let me know if the credits are OK for you or if you want to appear differently. I'll commit then.

Years, programming credits.

This looks fine now :)

Tested on Dodecanese which uses a DiskPlacer with a small radius -> does seem faster. Code seems obviously faster, though nothing is obvious in JS-land.

Thanks for the comments. Overall I don't think they warrant a lint-commit on this soonish, I'll keep it in mind for my next atlas diff I think.

I feel like skirmish maps make a better first impression as they are generally better maps and load much faster, so I would edge towards rejecting this.

In D918#127705, @Freagarach wrote:

The thing is, you'll have to move files around when changing the order, which is not really nice, IMHO.

Alright, thanks for reporting.

cc @borg- you want this I believe.

I feel like something like this (order random)

gather_metal_0_serfs.json
gather_metal_1_servants.json
gather_metal_2_shaftmining.json
gather_stone_0_silvermining.json
gather_stone_1_slaves.json
gather_stone_2_wedgemallet.json

might be reasonably efficient at conveying order, but also nicer than hardcoding "city"

I've kept the settings for DisplaYFrustrum and such since those aren't config options. I'm not sure we want that or not.
I think we could make them SYSTEM-level configs.

In D2610#127579, @Nescio wrote:

For comparison, proper minus signs (− U+2212) are used in aura descriptions and technology tooltips, not the type-able hyphen-minus -.

Erf, I'd suggest to revert that then...

In D2610#127545, @Freagarach wrote:

User XP should be over programmer XP here, IMHO.

I mean I'd argue that "user XP" changes basically none between "x" and "×"

In D2759#127468, @Stan wrote:

Also how worse does that make performance?

See above graph.

Ready for commit.

Bumped, fix the comments in IcmpRangeManager.h, spaces for consistency.

In D2791#127312, @Freagarach wrote:

How come? Moreover, one is not supposed to end here when we can't gather the resource.

@borg- update on that?

@borg- what do you think? Do you prefer Restricted classes ? Or making them "not" preferred classes?

I believe this might no longer need the GUI patches since we removed ballistic tower?

In D2610#127043, @Nescio wrote:

On my keyboard (English, international) × be typed with AltGr =. People can also copy it from other files (see e.g. D2895/rP23871), or from the style guide.

I think this is acceptable as a first diff - I'll clarify in the commit message that this is merely one step forward.

I meant the old code logic :p

Add a new script that ought to do something similar to what we're using poediff form.

I'd like to have @vladislavbelov's take on this before merging

Upload with context.

In D2496#127273, @Nescio wrote:

This patch went through 14 differentials; I don't remember having another patch that had that many.

In D2496#127253, @Nescio wrote:

Out of curiosity, what exactly did you change? The brit_hero_boudicca.xml file in D2496?id=13042 looks exactly the same as in D2496?id=13032, I really can't find a difference.

<Square disable=""/>
It's in the template itself.

(needs a rebase now)

Fix small mistake in boudicca footprint (Circle conflicting with Square)
Ready for commit.

This makes the Hero Elephant an absurdly good siege unit.

In D2929#127231, @Nescio wrote:

This is already possible right now without this patch.
One could move generic templates, e.g. template_unit_champion_cavalry_archer.xml → template_unit_cavalry_ranged_archer_champion.xml.

That seems objectively superior to our current organisation to me.

I'm kind of surprised that this change alone is sufficient to rebalance ranged vs melee units?