Description:
There is a boating exploit where players could repeatedly send and
retreat boats to effectively increase troop regeneration and maintain
almost double the max troop cap. This PR fixes#2388.
Summary
This pr adds a troop penalty to the boat retreats in
src/core/execution/TransportShipExecution.ts of 25 percent (currently
the same as land attacks, but may require fine tuning). this prevents,
to some degree, the ability to stockpile large amounts of troops above
your max cap.
Testing
I tested the change locally and confirmed that the troop penalty is
applied at the correct times and under the correct conditions, i.e. it
is only applied on successful retreat (applying on reteat initiation may
be confusing if you are told you have lost troops if the transport ship
never arrives anyway). The boating exploit is far less effective with
this fix in place.
Notes
- This is a exploit and does not introduce any new features.
- Existing game behavior outside the retreat penalty remains unchanged.
- The attack message is the same as the land attack, so the translation
should already be present.
Checklist
- [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
---------
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
This PR fixes a critical race condition bug where players could
unintentionally receive the traitor debuff when alliance requests were
accepted mid-attack.
Critical Bug Fixes#1866
**Root Cause:**
Players could bypass UI alliance checks ( isFriendly() ) by accepting
alliances and immediately attacking after that, causing the server to
treat the attack as betrayal
Solution: Added server-side alliance validation in
AttackExecution.init()
This ensures attacks on allies are blocked at the server level.
- Once Bots and Nations decide to attack, they breaks the alliance. I
added maybeConsiderBetrayal(), which currently always returns true. I’ll
add proper logic for alliance-breaking soon on another PR; this didn’t
exist in the code before.
## 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:
abodcraft1
---------
Co-authored-by: evanpelle <evanpelle@gmail.com>
Problem: attacking a player right before accepting an alliance request
is very effective since the requester can't fight back or reclaim his
territory without canceling the alliance and being penalized with the
traitor debuff.
Change:
- Attacking a player after he requested an alliance automatically
rejects the request
- No changes to existing attacks in both directions, only new attacks
affect the request
- [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 agreement (only required once).
regression is found:
IngloriousTom
## Description:
Players received "traitor" debuff when alliances were formed after
attacks started, creating an unfair race condition.
the problem was mentioned here
https://discord.com/channels/1284581928254701718/1399115120486912100
## 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 agreement (only required once).
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
Kipstzz
---------
Co-authored-by: Scott Anderson <662325+scottanderson@users.noreply.github.com>
## Description:
Remove Cosmetics from PlayerInfo. The game engine should have no
knowledge of cosmetics since they shouldn't affect game play at all.
Instead pass player cosmetics into the GameView.
## 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:
This is meant to give players more customization options.
Permission handling hasn’t really been implemented yet.
## 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:
aotumuri
## 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:
Taken from PR #506
Improve transport source tile by considering border extremums
Only calculate better spawn tile for humans, and have the sender
calculate it and send the src tile in the intent for better performance.
## 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
## Please put your Discord username so you can be contacted if a bug or
regression is found:
<DISCORD USERNAME>
evan
Co-authored-by: evan <openfrontio@gmail.com>
unique-coder-124