Resolves#3154
## Description:
#2716 introduced nuke cancellation logic on alliance acceptance via
`AllianceRequestReplyExecution`. The radial menu action, though, calls
`AllianceRequestExecution` instead, which accepts the alliance if a
request has already been made by the other player.
This PR moves the nuke cancellation logic to `GameImpl`, hooking into
the `acceptAllianceRequest` method, therefore accounting for every
alliance acceptance, regardless of the specific action that brought to
that.
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [x] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [x] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
deshack_82603
Resolves#2484
## Description:
- When an alliance is created between two players, any incoming nukes
between them are destroyed mid-air.
This prevents the traitor debuff from being applied on impact, even if
the nukes were launched before the alliance was formed.
- If a player has launched nukes at multiple nations, only the nukes
targeting the newly allied nation are destroyed.
This is what the players will see after the alliance is created (in case
they have launched nukes at each other):
<img width="423" height="125" alt="Screenshot 2026-01-04 092907"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6544fb7a-7623-4fc3-b799-89ef8fe897d6"
/>
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [x] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [x] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
assessin.
## Description:
- **Nations now specifically target AFK players, traitors, and players
who are already being attacked (they gang up on them).** Depends on the
difficulty.
- Added ally assistance directly to the attack order (instead of calling
it separately beforehand).
- Added ally assistance to `findBestNukeTarget`.
- Removed some checks from `findBestNukeTarget` (not necessary; better
checks will follow in a dedicated nuking PR).
- Relation updates on attack now depend on difficulty (makes Easy &
Medium nations a bit easier).
- On betrayal, every nation in the game previously received a –40
relation penalty toward the betrayer. That was too extreme, so now this
only applies only to neighbors.
- Nations send fewer alliance requests now; it felt like too many
before.
- In team games, nations may now reject alliance requests more often
(depending on difficulty).
- To ensure there are enough non-friendly players to stop the crown with
nukes, nations may now reject alliance requests if the other player has
too many alliances (on Hard and Impossible difficulty).
- Rebalanced nation emoji usage a bit.
- Nations may now send an emoji when they get MIRVed.
## Please complete the following:
- [X] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [X] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [X] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [X] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
FloPinguin
---------
Co-authored-by: iamlewis <lewismmmm@gmail.com>
Resolves#2448
Hi team,
I've implemented and locally tested the alliance-related changes
(including unit tests and some manual simulation with multiple browser
profiles).
Unfortunately I wasn't able to perform full end-to-end testing on the
live game server with two separate machines/accounts.
If someone on the team (or another contributor) can verify the alliance
flow with two real players, that would be greatly appreciated before
merging. Happy to hop on a call or provide any clarification needed.
Thanks!
## Description:
Fixed a race condition bug where donations (troops/gold) between human
players failed after forming an alliance. The issue was caused by a
one-tick delay in `AllianceRequestReplyExecution`: the alliance
acceptance logic ran in `tick()` instead of `init()`, meaning the
alliance wasn't created until the tick after the execution was added. If
a donation execution was added in the same turn as the alliance
acceptance, it would fail the `isFriendly()` check because the alliance
didn't exist yet.
**Root cause:** When human players formed alliances via reply, the
execution model delayed alliance creation by one tick, while bots called
`accept()` directly without this delay.
**Solution:** Moved alliance acceptance logic from `tick()` to `init()`
in `AllianceRequestReplyExecution.ts`, ensuring immediate alliance
creation and eliminating race conditions with donations.
**Changes:**
- Modified
`src/core/execution/alliance/AllianceRequestReplyExecution.ts` to
process alliance replies in `init()` instead of `tick()`
- Added comprehensive test suite `tests/AllianceDonation.test.ts` with 5
test cases covering donation scenarios after alliance formation (reply
and mutual request flows)
- All existing tests pass (323 total)
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates (N/A - backend logic
fix only)
- [x] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file (N/A - no user-facing text
changes)
- [x] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
Discord: loacky
GitHub: @LoackyBit
---------
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
Describe the PR.
Added a new chat message from the server once player wants to renew the
alliance, to the other player.
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
<img width="572" height="256" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/7feec21f-fff5-4544-8992-caf99c45913d"
/>
- [x] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [x] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
DISCORD_USERNAME
notifxy (1379678982676676639)
## Description:
Bots on the same team as a human player will no longer embargo them if
they betray an alliance with an opposing team player.
Fixes#1845
## Please complete the following:
- [X] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [X] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [X] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [X] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
sibyljudith
## Description:
This PR does two things:
1. Allows you to send an alliance request to approve an existing
request, ex:
* player A sends req to player B
* now player B can send an ally request to player A, which accepts the
request from player A.
This way even if you lose or don't see the alliance notification, you
can still accept the alliance.
2. Have AllianceRequestExecution reject the request if not accepted or
rejected. There is a bug where sometimes the EventDisplay does not
trigger the delete() function, resulting in hung alliance requests. I
couldn't figure out why the delete() function is sometimes not called,
but I think it's better design to have core/ itself handle abandoned
alliance requests, this was UI bugs can't break the game state.
## Please complete the following:
- [ ] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [ ] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [ ] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [ ] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
evan
## Description:
**--Fix oversight in v24--**
In v24, alliance renewal was introduced. But a Bot or Nation never
answers to it. So the Event Panel expiration message + clicking to Renew
and waiting, is all in vain if the other player is not a human. Like in
Single player in all cases. The message after ~30 seconds is always
"Alliance with xxx expired". This feels illogical and there's no purpose
for showing a Request to Renew button if it then always expires.
Also reported by players like here:
https://discord.com/channels/1284581928254701718/1284581928833388619/1398249123093676094
This PR fixes it by having the non-human reciever of the request, say
yes to depending on attiude towards the human and chance. This feels
more realistic.
The requestor is always the human player because they click a button in
EventsDisplay. So there is always already an extension request which the
bot can react to with another extension request to have the alliance be
extended.
**--Add tests--**
It adds tests for extending alliance between human and non-human player.
One for AllianceExtensionExecution simply testing if alliance between
human and non-human can be extended. And one in BotBehavior, testing if
it correctly handles an extension request by adding a new
AllianceExtensionExecution.
**--Fix silent bug in existing test--**
Adding the new test for human and non-human for
AllianceExtensionExecution, i ran into a bug in the existing test for
extending alliance between humans. Which made the test always pass
because expirationAt wasn't fetched correctly. Had to fix that too,
without intending that for this PR beforehand. And then had to include
the bugfix from PR #1582 (v25) in it too to have the alliance actually
extended. More details below:
(-- The existing test would always return 'all passed' because it did
not get the expiresAt() but got the createdAt +
config.AllianceDuration() for both expirationBefore and expirationAfter.
createdAt is immutable so before and after would be the same. And then
it did not test for toBeGreaterThan, which would have failed. But it
tested wrongfully for toBeGreaterThanOrEqual which was a pass even when
the expirationBefore and expirationAfter would be the same and no
extension had taken place.
-- The bugfix from PR 1582 needed to be included now too. Because only
with those changes, the existing test has its alliance truly extended
and only with that the expirationAt actually changed. Actually, checking
if extend() was called isn't needed anymore, since we now check the
expirationAt correctly which on its own tells us if extend() was
succesful. But left this addition from PR 1582 in since it can't do any
harm.)
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [x] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [x] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
- [ ] I have read and accepted the CLA agreement (only required once).
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
tryout33
---------
Co-authored-by: evanpelle <openfrontio@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Drills Kibo <59177241+drillskibo@users.noreply.github.com>
## Description:
On Alliance extension, the key "events_display.alliance_renewed" is
displayed in the Event Panel. Reported in
https://discord.com/channels/1284581928254701718/1397197460085932184
Since displayMessage doesn't expect or do translations, just puts out
hardcoded English messages so far, it doesn't do anything with the
recieved key and just puts it in the Event Panel as is. This PR fixes it
as a follow-up of #1359.
With this, it also introduces a base which can be used to translate
hardcoded messages coming from other Executions. That is out of the
scope of this PR.
PRs #1532 and #1536 both fix issues with Alliance Renewal in v24. If
possible approve 1532 (this one) first and then 1536 not too far after
if github can indeed merge them.
BEFORE:
<img width="533" height="353" alt="alliancerenewbefore"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b97f7279-8daf-4049-96fb-1d5a1e360ec4"
/>
AFTER:
(tested locally with Nations by not checking their answer; they normally
don't answer to alliance renewal request which is another issue)
<img width="787" height="406" alt="After fix"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/9fc3a0e2-b151-486f-b6ef-692177e387ad"
/>
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [x] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [x] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
- [x] I have read and accepted the CLA aggreement (only required once).
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
tryout33
## Description:
The EventsDisplay now checks if your ally is alive before sending a
"request to renew" event. Also fixed so incorrect translation keys.
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [x] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [x] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
- [x] I understand that submitting code with bugs that could have been
caught through manual testing blocks releases and new features for all
contributors
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
evan
## Description:
About 30s before an alliance is about to expire, both players receive a
prompt to extend the alliance. If both players agree the alliance is
extended.
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [x] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [x] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
- [x] I understand that submitting code with bugs that could have been
caught through manual testing blocks releases and new features for all
contributors
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
evan
## Description:
Answering issue: #1017
[Cleanup] Pass Player into the execution constructor instead of PlayerID
I have tested the changes running and playing a full game. I do not know
other way to test the changes, please inform me ❤️
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [x] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [x] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
- [x] I understand that submitting code with bugs that could have been
caught through manual testing blocks releases and new features for all
contributors
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
Lele
---------
Co-authored-by: lva <lva@rovsing.dk>
## Description:
Changed from consolex to console
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [x] I process any text displayed to the user through translateText()
and I've added it to the en.json file
- [x] I have added relevant tests to the test directory
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
- [x] I understand that submitting code with bugs that could have been
caught through manual testing blocks releases and new features for all
contributors
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
@qqkedsi
## Description:
Improve type safety and runtime correctness by:
1. Enabling TypeScript's
[strictNullChecks](https://www.typescriptlang.org/tsconfig/#strictNullChecks)
compiler option.
2. Replacing all loose equality operators (`==` and `!=`) with strict
equality operators (`===` and `!==`).
3. Cleaning up of type declarations, null handling logic, and equality
expressions throughout the project.
Currently, the code allows implicit assumptions that `null` and
`undefined` are interchangeable, and relies on type-coercing equality
checks that can introduce subtle bugs. These practices make it difficult
to reason about when values may be absent and hinder the effectiveness
of static analysis.
Migrating to strict null checks and enforcing strict equality
comparisons will clarify intent, reduce bugs, and make the codebase
safer and easier to maintain.
Fixes#466
## Please complete the following:
- [x] I have added screenshots for all UI updates
- [x] I confirm I have thoroughly tested these changes and take full
responsibility for any bugs introduced
- [x] I understand that submitting code with bugs that could have been
caught through manual testing blocks releases and new features for all
contributors
---------
Co-authored-by: Scott Anderson <662325+scottanderson@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: evanpelle <openfrontio@gmail.com>
Mattia Migliorini