WhiteTreePaladin

Very nice. Looking forward to more.

The wavy roof looks great. I like it. Is this a scenario only structure, or can it be constructed in the game?

I think the Gauls might be overusing the heads on posts. Probably wouldn't have those on an inn?

I agree with the idea of making battalions a more late game feature. That's when you have the most units and things begin to get unmanageable.

I agree. I also hadn't heard of "malus" before. I'm fairly confident that at least ninety-nine percent of native English speakers haven't either. For those speaking Latin-based languages, it may very well be a different story. The ordering of "bonus-malus" does make more sense as generally positive things are listed first.

Awesome! Never thought of that. Kind of makes me think we should make it work in the single player GUI though.

I think it is a very worthwhile feature and would help with immersion. It's the same behavior as in AoK. Also, some players like a battlefield view which would benefit from the leaf undersides. (If performance is an issue, we could swap the actor for a version with the leaf undersides for the falling animation and gathering process. That might be too much effort though.)

Just some thoughts on these points: 1. I don't think local vs global is too big of an issue. It would fit nicer if upgrades were applied after being researched, but it is too much work to upgrade individual units. (Battalions would support this though.) 2. I think the territories would be per civil center. More powerful/advanced cities would have more influence. There perhaps could be a late game tech to unify/annex all connected cities into a single territory. This would annex all the connected civil centers into single territories. The most advanced civil center in the connected territory would be used to determine buildings available to use or techs available to research in the connected territory. (A player may have multiple unconnected territories.) 3. That happens in real life. Step a few feet over and you change from one city's jurisdiction to another. Taxes, laws, etc. are all changed within just a few feet.

Logged in and voted.

I like this idea. It makes each upgraded settlement more valuable.

An interesting idea. It does seem appropriate that the most central / core building should be upgraded both visually and in effect. We do the effect part to a limited degree with the LOS increase per phase, but this is a somewhat weak upgrade. Most is left to new research or newly available structures. In BFME2, you upgraded your fortresses (combined fortress / civil center). They had upgrade slots that you clicked and chose an available upgrade (defense turret, etc.) They also featured general research upgrades like increased vision or armor. The upgrades always had a visual affect so you (and your enemies) could see at a glance what you had chosen. Perhaps we could combine some of these ideas? Upgrades make the structures more valuable (because of the additional time and resources needed to create). Advanced units and technologies could be available from the most upgraded structures rather than just the most "advanced" structures (like a fortress).

Age of Empires 3 did something similar with the copper and silver mines. They both contributed to the "coin" resource, but I don't think they had different gather rates.

I like the idea. Kind of like the persian palace, but requires garrisoning. Sounds like a good way to keep civilians useful in the late game.

Ah, someone else mentions BFME. In BFME, maintaining the same units battle after battle was critical. There were more ranks available (1-10 in BFME1 and 1-5 in BFME2), so there was a large difference between experienced troops and regular troops. Also, all upgrades had to be researched at a building and then purchased for each battalion. You had to research the tech first, then have enough money left over to actually purchase it per battalion. Losing an upgraded veteran battalion was a big deal. However, it is too much effort to manage veteran units if they are all individual. It was similar for buildings because they all grew in "rank" too. (Buildings only featured 3 ranks.) They didn't gain rank by defeating enemy units like battalions did, they just grew after existing for a certain amount of time. So, if a structure was destroyed before you had a chance to research all the advanced techs from the building, it would be awhile before you could get another building up to that rank/level. However, you never lost techs that were researched, and you didn't have to keep the building to continue using the tech.The way they handled technologies made it feel more like you were involved in production. We just research and immediately all units are upgraded everywhere. Elite unit battalions could only trained from high level buildings. If you destroyed all of those, recovery was slow since you couldn't train advanced units for a good while. Of course, if a player was strong enough to destroy all of your advanced structures, they were generally going to win anyway. Really like the way things were handled in that game. (Heroes were ridiculously overpowered though, and the civilian side left something be be desired.)

Hmm, not sure which one it would be (although it's happened in several games). I think it happened in at least one of these. Oct 31 9528commands.txt 9528metadata.json.txt Oct 24 3931commands.txt 3755-3commands.txt I'll catch it if it happens again and get a definite commands.txt. I was kind of giving up that it would be fixed this release, so I didn't bother to re-report it.

I'm still getting odd passablity issues. My computer ally built a fortress on a mountain (that should not have been reachable). He then proceeded to build a full dozen battering rams.

Oops. And here I thought I included everything this time. lol Thanks for fixing it.

ERROR: JavaScript error: simulation/ai/petra/defenseManager.js line 401 TypeError: army is undefined m.DefenseManager.prototype.checkEvents@simulation/ai/petra/defenseManager.js:401:1 m.DefenseManager.prototype.update@simulation/ai/petra/defenseManager.js:18:2 m.HQ.prototype.update@simulation/ai/petra/headquarters.js:2039:2 m.PetraBot.prototype.OnUpdate@simulation/ai/petra/_petrabot.js:123:3 m.BaseAI.prototype.HandleMessage@simulation/ai/common-api/baseAI.js:81:2 commands.txt metadata.json.txt interestinglog.html mainlog.html I think I've got everything this time.

Once they are on land, they stick to the terrain but ignore all else. They'll sail up and down hills, and fly right through forests. Quite entertaining actually.

Happened again. No warning, no error dialog and the pyrogenesis process is gone. The interesting log has been modified, but it is still empty. commands.txt system_info.txt mainlog.html

It happened again. This was a single player game this time. Git revision: 9bdb767577ebece38d60d66c70d9da772b81d04e Crashlog and oos logs were not changed (still have older timestamp). Interesting log was completely empty, but it was modified at the same time system_info was modified... commands.txt system_info.txt mainlog.html

I'm pretty sure I encountered the issue with rams and formation groups in the attached commands.txt. It wasn't the worse case of it that I've had, but it did happen repeatedly. (Had to rename metadata.json to get it to upload.) commands.txt metadata_json.txt I don't remember the revision, but it would have been whatever was current on the Git repo this past Sunday (27th) afternoon (3:00 or so).

Just wanted to mention some pathfinding issues. I know it's a long process, and really appreciate the working being done. 1. Units get stuck trying to drop off resources at the edge of a building. This seems to be mostly fixed. Haven't had this issue in a long time. 2. Units ignore movement orders. (The reintroduction of formations has allowed this to affect groups of units rather than just single large units.) This happens many times during a match and interferes with enjoyment of the game. It occurs with larger units like rams and lately has begun to affect formations of units. 3. Units sometimes ignore impassable terrain and structures. (This started fairly recently.) This includes units sailing over mountains and walking through structures. On rarer occasions, ships even move around on land.

Yeah, I think it has been overwritten. I did check them when I first got the commands.txt and did not see anything of note. There is a crashlog.txt which is dated the same day as the original post, so I'll include that here. crashlog.txt

Was playing a LAN game and the game closed without an error dialog. The other player said that my units walked through his walls right before the crash. GIT revision: aa3abfb1f03dc910b14b3f5bb15bc7a9aa7e72ad commands.txt