Thanks for the review work and that new ram and taking care to include the blendfile :-)
Might want to ask the author if he wants his full name in gui/credits/art.json.
(Guess someone playing games frequently might want to check the balance effect, I'll leave a ping for @Grugnas @Hannibal_Barca)

Having the ram template commited in svn is really great, thanks. But having it added in the maur fortress to be usable in game would have deserved a discussion or a review. I think it is important that each civ keeps its unique traits for gameplay reason (even if historically maur had rams) and we should not standardize all civs just because we have the models.

I kinda agree with mimo, diversity is needed among the civs and "unused" doesn't mean "useless".
my personal opinion is that Yoddhas are supposed to be an alternative to mechanical sieges since they basically only have crush damage despite they are vulnerable to pierce damage aswell like War Elephants, standing at their current concept, which may be interesting but not polished. Thus the siege may eventually replace yoddhas which are rarely used ( they aren't very cost / efficient in the current version, at least) and maiden may eventually be able to switch between weapons in order to at least keep some unique traits and not to become an "alternative textured" Persia.

Okay I'll remove that line and won't do anything like it in the future.

@Grugnas While I get your point I think unused objects are uselessly packaged.

In rP20446#24798, @Stan wrote:

Okay I'll remove that line and won't do anything like it in the future.

@Grugnas While I get your point I think unused objects are uselessly packaged.

They can still be used in scenarios or mods, so far from useless.

True. :)
But starting from there everything n could be committed from WW2 tanks to entire civ because why not. It's extreme but you get the idea. Maybe we should have a special optional mod for scenarios. Dunno

In rP20446#24800, @Stan wrote:

True. :)
But starting from there everything n could be committed from WW2 tanks to entire civ because why not. It's extreme but you get the idea. Maybe we should have a special optional mod for scenarios. Dunno

A valid example of "unimplemented" (even if it is used) but not "useless" addition can be given by iberian swordsman cavalry not available for iberians but as mercenary unit for carthage.
Also it is quite common to have different units in campaigns and in multiplayer games.
( i already talked about yoddhas )

A valid example of "unimplemented" (even if it is used) but not "useless" addition can be given by iberian swordsman cavalry not available for iberians but as mercenary unit for carthage.
Also it is quite common to have different units in campaigns and in multiplayer games.
( i already talked about yoddhas )

In this case that sounds sensible :
Anyway let's close the debate here that 's not really productive anyway.

Thanks for the input guys I'll fix it asap

Just because they aren't referenced explicitly doesn't mean they are unused. On survival of the fittest (and the units demo map) these rams will be spawned.
Otherwise unused models are useful to scenario editors.

Random ideas about using the ram include a pair-tech where one can chose between war elephants and rams or allowing war elephants only if a wild elephant was captured.
(Other than that I agree with mimo that it is important to distinguish the civs.)

Having the template means the Mauryans can already train them, namely at captured fortresses and siege workshops of other factions. From there it's only a small step to enable siege weapons at their own fortress as well.
If this is undesirable, then renaming the template to anything except the default naming is necessary; e.g. replacing maur_ with mauryan_ works.

Personally I would prefer removing lines 15--21:

-units/{civ}_mechanical_siege_ballista_packed
-units/{civ}_mechanical_siege_scorpio_packed
-units/{civ}_mechanical_siege_oxybeles_packed
-units/{civ}_mechanical_siege_lithobolos_packed
-units/{civ}_mechanical_siege_ram
-units/{civ}_mechanical_siege_tower

(Or actually I would prefer to remove siege weapons and technologies from all fortresses of all factions, and enable siege workshops instead, but that's a different discussion.)

However, if it is decided Mauryans can have siege weapons, then probably line 5 of the siege technologies also has to be edited:
"requirements": { "all": [{ "tech": "phase_city" }, { "notciv": "maur" }] },

In Stan proposed to keep it as is (Mauryans can train the ram at captured buildings) and someone else didn't object and I won't object either:
https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/23598-mauryan-ram/&tab=comments#comment-345090

In rP20446#24826, @Nescio wrote:

if it is decided Mauryans can have siege weapons, then probably line 5 of the siege technologies also has to be edited:
"requirements": { "all": [{ "tech": "phase_city" }, { "notciv": "maur" }] },

Just for the ram at captured fortresses it might be more misleading to the player.
If they can train them natively, then certainly.