## Response to alliance requests
Previously the way nations responded to alliance requests was quite
simple / boring / exploitable. Basically you couldn't ally them if you
had a bad relation with them, or if you had too many alliances.
Otherwise they would just take it.
Now there is a **complete decision tree which is based on the
difficulty**. The nations should also feel more human now.
For example, just like humans, nations will now consider to take an
alliance even if you have a bad relation with them (If you are a
threat).
Also, nations no longer check if YOU have too many alliances. Now they
do what humans do: Check if THEY have too many alliances (they want to
be able to attack somebody).
Another big change is the default case: Previously it was just `return
true`. Now it's `return isAlliancePartnerSimilarlyStrong`. So they do
what humans do: Take a quick look at their troop count before allying
them.
## Sending alliance requests
Previously alliance requests were sent randomly. Quite boring.
Now we use the same decision tree as for responding.
## Alliance extension requests
They also use the same decision tree.
## Tests
Tested it a lot in singleplayer.
I have planned to add unit tests for all the nation/bot stuff in the
upcoming cleanup phase.
## 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
## Description:
Second and last changes to special bot names. Sorry to anyone who might
feel left out, the list is non-exhaustive.
## 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:
tryout33
## Description:
Replace BFS with DFS and eliminate GC pressure in calculateClusters():
- Switch from O(N) queue.shift() to O(1) stack.pop() operations
- Replace Set.has()/Set.add() with Uint8Array bitfield
- Add reusable buffer management to avoid repeated allocations
- Implement callback-based neighbor iteration to eliminate array
allocations
- Add forEachNeighborWithDiag() method to Game interface and GameImpl
- Remove now unused GameImpl import from PlayerExecution
Describe the PR.
## 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:
DISCORD_USERNAME
## Description:
I closed my previous PR #2533 which was already reviewed by evan (but
not yet merged) because I noticed some issues.
Which led me to changing the enemy selection entirely.
Nations / Bots previously had a fixed enemy which they kept for 100
ticks (10 seconds). This could make them react too late and feel slow.
Now they are a bit more responsive.
But the main benefit: Without a fixed enemy we can do multiple
sendAttack() on the same tick, which allowed me to give impossible
nations extremely efficient parallel bot attacks:
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/38f65623-fbf0-4e98-a833-5fcba2ee6eee
Previously nations were so slow in taking out bots that you could even
encircle them on the Archiran map...
Now they are like 200% faster (but only on the impossible difficulty)
## Nuke enemy selection
Previously, the enemy for troop attacks and nukes was identical. Now, as
we no longer have a fixed enemy in BotBehaviour, I added
findBestNukeTarget() to select better nuke-targets. I will probably open
a PR soon which makes nations nuke the crown :)
## Betrayal logic
While revamping the attack logic I had to work on the betrayal logic,
which was quite confusing, with many negations. And the betrayals were
just random.
So I made it easier to understand with maybeBetrayAndAttack().
Now it does betray friends if we have 10 times more troops than them. I
will improve that method in a future PR, but already now it should be
better than just betraying randomly.
## Attack order
Previously, nations attacked in this order:
- TerraNullius (Untaken land and nuked territory)
- Bots
- Retaliate against incoming attacks
Now its in this order:
- TerraNullius (Untaken land)
- Retaliate against incoming attacks
- Bots
- TerraNullius (Nuked territory)
So the changes are these:
- After throwing a nuke onto a nation, they will no longer ignore
incoming attacks. Previously they attacked the nuked territory first.
Very common singleplayer problem.
- Nations now retaliate against incoming attacks before attacking bots.
Previously you could attack a nation but they did not care because there
were still bots left.
I also changed the attack order of bots a bit (retaliate before
attacking randoms), but that isn't even noticeable.
## Big bug fixed
Additionally, I fixed a big bug: selectEnemy() oftentimes returned null
(because of enemySanityCheck) and therefore no attack happened.
This was especially visible in games where nations are surrounded by
friends (Team games and nations vs humans).
This was also the reason why Enzo could play nations vs humans in
singleplayer and NO NATION of the much bigger nation team would try to
attack him.
## 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
## Description:
Special bot names. If the solution seems convoluted for such an easy
thing, that is because: not all bots find a spawn position, so only
assign a candidate name after finding a spawn. And the first few are
almost always overwritten by Nation spawns so the first 20 just get a
random name. Only then do we assign from the provided lists. For the
random names, some might get the same name but that's not an issue as
no-one will notice and they're off the map quite fast anyway.
## 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:
tryout33
## Description:
Nations no longer send random boats to their bordering enemies.
Usually it looked a bit stupid when nations did that ("Why don't you
attack your bordering enemy directly?")
## 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
## Description:
- Removed the temporary UnitType.Construction and embedded construction
state into real units via isUnderConstruction().
- Centralized non-structure spawning to perform a single validation
right before unit creation/launch.
- Updated UI layers to render construction state without relying on the
removed enum.
- Adjusted and created tests to match the new flow and to cover the
no-refundscenarios.
# Tests updated
- tests/economy/ConstructionGold.test.ts: covers structure cost
deduction and income, tolerant of passive income; ensures no refunds
during construction.
- tests/nukes/HydrogenAndMirv.test.ts: accounts for single-check launch
flow; MIRV test targets a player-owned tile; ensures launch after
payment.
- tests/client/graphics/UILayer.test.ts: mocks now provide
isUnderConstruction and real type strings;
## 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:
CrackeRR1
---------
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@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:
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:
After the v27 playtest, some players experienced instant death on spawn.
The issue was that the human random spawn occasionally coincided with a
bot’s spawn. Previously, bot spawns didn’t account for human spawn
locations and could appear on the same tile, now they don’t.
## Please complete the following:
- [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:
nikolaj_mykola
---------
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
See PR https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/pull/2203
It was reverted. This unreverts it, with an added fix for boat troops
not getting returned to owner. And small comment updates. And a const
for boatOwner to re-use.
The added bugfix is check for this.sourceTile === null in the retreat()
function in AttackExecution. A boat attack always sets removeTroops to
false because the troops were already removed from owner troops when the
boat departed. They don't have to be removed again in AttackExecution
init, when the boat lands and the attack starts. But at the end of the
attack, in retreat() in AttackExecution, the starting/boat troops still
need to be returned to the owner. That's why even if removeTroops is
false, when sourceTile is not null (only when it's a boat attack) we add
back the troops to the owner.
## 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:
tryout33
---------
Co-authored-by: Fx Morin <28154542+FxMorin@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Ryan <7389646+ryanbarlow97@users.noreply.github.com>
## Description:
This PR is intended to increase singleplayer fun.
This is a follow-up to my previous PR #2161, which made the
"Hiding-Strategy on small islands" harder.
But its still possible. You can easily warship-infest the map and get
rich from the trade, even though you are playing on impossible
difficulty.
Also you can easily hinder the nations to, for example, get from the
left to the right side of the world map. So you are always in full
control of the game.
This PR makes nations send a warship if their troop transport boat got
destroyed. The warship will travel to the location where the boat got
destroyed.
Because the nations send more boats now (previous PR), this actual has
an impact and there is more action on the map now :)
The chance of retaliation is based on the game difficulty.
### COMPARISON
[Youtube Video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4_iP54LGNU) of me
playing the infestation-strat without this PR.
[Youtube Video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHesXJwPtcA) of me
playing the infestation-strat with this PR (Its sill possible but not
that easy, I gave up lol).
## 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
## 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:
Some stats are missing from the recorded game stats:
- Unit upgrade
- Gold from trade and from steal
The gold from trade/steal was introduced with [PR
784](https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/pull/784) but was
quickly reverted with [PR
927](https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/pull/927), probably
involuntarily.
## 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:
IngloriousTom
## Description:
Implements SAM range extension for stacked SAMs to cover hydros as
requested in #2347 and many times from users in discord.
This implementation is as simple as possible: At level 5 and higher,
SAMs extend their range to the range of a hydrogen bomb + 10 for a small
safety margin. Levels 2-4 are interpolated between.
Screenshot to show the sizes compared to a hydro:
<img width="400" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a857d66c-e3d4-467f-855f-3539cc90b719"
/>
Everything works together with the new range UI, although I might need
to unify with / rebase on #2350. Not yet tested with #2348, but
shouldn't be an issue.
## Input needed:
- Should I add tests for this?
- This is in effect a massive buff to SAMs, might be too strong. Popular
ideas / suggestions from Discord to balance things:
- Cap the SAM upgrade level at the maximum range (easy to do)
- Alternative, instead of capping the level, decrease the range when
missiles are reloading
- Increase the cost scaling for SAMs per stack, and scale way higher
(e.g. 1.5M > 3M > 4.5M > 6M or something like that) (UI integration
unclear, breaks with existing cost logic)
- Decrease SAM hit probability for Hydros
I'm happy to implement any of these paths, or just roll with the simple
way it's set up now, just let me know.
## 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:
newyearnewphil
---------
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
The **proximityBonusPortsNb** function increased the likelihood a
tradeship would go to a nearby port. But now that trade gold is nerfed
from nearby ports, we shouldn't encourage trading with ports that are
too close. So now add another factor **tradeShipShortRangeDebuff** That
cancels out the proximity bonus if the port is too close.
Now tradeships are encouraged to go to ports that are close, but not too
close.
Also move tradingPorts method to the PortExecution class because that's
the only place it's used.
## 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:
evan
## Description:
### Nations rarely sent random boats. Now they are sending twice as
many.
It feels right now, not too many and not too few random boats.
To make sure that small island nations with, for example, 10k troops
don't repeatedly spam boats into an nation with 1.5M troops (that makes
no sense), they no longer send boats to opponents which have more than
twice the amount of troops.
| my optimizations - 27s into the game - `8 Boats active` | openfront.io
live - 27s into the game - `only 2 Boats active` |
| :---: | :---: |
| <img width="2560" height="1068" alt="27s into the game - 8 Boats
active"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/258e3d69-d86b-4c68-94ec-ade04c6c18b3"
/>|<img width="2560" height="1068" alt="27s into the game - 2 Boats
active"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/343603d6-e95d-402c-a660-cc54f715d148"
/>|
| my optimizations - 1m20s into the game - `much more boats` |
openfront.io live - 1m20s into the game - `only 4 boats active` |
| :---: | :---: |
| <img width="2560" height="1068" alt="1m20s into the game - much more
boats"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/bbe35603-8db4-4d82-af45-c77b8ef0dcbf"
/> | <img width="2560" height="1068" alt="1m20s into the game - 4 boats"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f698794d-f94f-49fb-a09a-1a89b292456f"
/> |
### There was a bug in the random boat sending.
It did not check if the target is the player himself.
That caused console warnings and a reduced amount of boat-sending.
### The Hiding-Strategy on small islands on the impossible difficulty is
now harder!
Because the random-boat-sending-method preferred large landmasses
instead of small islands (it randomly selects a valid tile),
human-players could easily hide on them, play a
warship-infestation-strat and nearly NEVER get boat-attacked by nations.
I implemented that the random boat functionality now searches for bots
and untaken tiles before searching for nations / humans. That way, they
will try to take some of these tiny islands before the human-player
does. Also its cool to see nations playing on the entire available
land-tiles instead of just the bigger landmasses.
Fixes#1916 (Please check this issue for screenshots and more info)
| my optimizations - 6m53s into the game - `only 5 islands not taken!` |
openfront.io live - 6m53s into the game - `19 islands not taken!` |
| :---: | :---: |
| <img width="1078" height="876" alt="6m53s into the game - 5 islands
not taken!"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/6c103ca1-7d4c-4d0d-948f-3313839302a7"
/> | <img width="1102" height="852" alt="6m53s into the game - 19
islands not taken!"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/01cc512d-71c9-47aa-b4b1-f7cd5123a782"
/> |
| my optimizations - 6m53s into the game - `all islands taken!` |
openfront.io live - 6m53s into the game - `8 islands not taken!` |
| :---: | :---: |
| <img width="2154" height="489" alt="6m53s into the game - 0 islands
not taken!"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/fc8000b2-de28-4d47-859d-0cc3c6d28ac3"
/> | <img width="2181" height="317" alt="6m53s into the game - 8 islands
not taken!"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/093243de-f6dc-41ee-ab5e-7e485fe27646"
/>|
### Nations now boat-attack other nations more often!
If there are two nations on two very large landmasses, which are divided
by water, they nearly NEVER attacked each other.
Most attack-functionality relies on the enemies sharing a border. If
they don't have one, the only possible attack-mechanism is the
random-boat-sending. But for very large landmasses (=> very large number
of coastal tiles) it can take a long, long time before it randomly
selects an enemy-tile. With the bug I described above ("did not check if
the target is the player himself") it took even longer. And on the
world-map, the nations have to go over iceland, this is also very
unlikely.
So I implemented the method selectNearestIslandEnemy, which specifically
doesn't cares about borders. It makes sure that a nation always has
someone to attack. This method only gets used as a fallback, and only if
a nation has no borders with anybody.
Fixes#1916 (Please check this issue for screenshots and more info)
| my optimizations - 29m41s into the game - `China won and is in the
process of killing the last enemy` | openfront.io live - NEARLY A HOUR
into the game - `UK finally won. There are still 14 players on the
map...` |
| :---: | :---: |
| <img width="2560" height="1068" alt="localhost_9000_"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a8107b88-19c8-4df7-a3fd-76d3d3e05d8e"
/> | <img width="2560" height="1068" alt="openfront io_ (1)"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0d80e503-d5ed-41d4-a103-33dffc302001"
/> |
## 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
Adds a timer before self deleting units
Adds a loading bar under deleting units
Adds a timer in radial menu for clarity purposes
- [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
regression is found:
Mr.Box
---------
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
Have AFK player's Warships not attack team members ships, like Transport
Ships boating in. If team mate conquers the AFK player, transfer over
Warships and Transport Ships to conqueror. The transfered Transport
ships attack in the name of the new owner when landing, and when they
are retreated they move back to a new owner shore tile if they have any.
Added tests. Expectation is this PR will be merged in v26 as the real
solution for the temporary workaround of deleting warships.
**Currently:**
- An AFK player can be attacked without troop loss by their team
members. For this purpose, isFriendly now returns false if the other
player isDisconnected
- But that meant Warships would get False from isFriendly too, and
attack the ships and boats of their team members.
- [Temporary workaround was to delete
warships](https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/commit/eea8db7a06aed50c005db35ad55ece026f7a3643)
as soon as the player was deemed AFK. But this is a disadvantage to the
team. For example the AFK player could have 6 warships in the waters,
either defending team land or helping the team cross over to the enemy
team.
- Transport Ships that were on the way to attack, were still deleted
after the AFK player was conquered. But this is also a disadvantage, if
say a transport ship has just managed to breach through to the enemy
lands despite warships all around. That could have made the win for the
team.
(Left to think about: do we want to transfer part of the defender troops
to the isOnSameTeam attacker? Defender looses less troops in the attack
from their team mate. You'd expect troops to lay down their arms mostly,
if the attacker is on the same team and doesn't loose troops themselves.
Those troops that they loose less than normal, are then added to the
attacker once they've been deemed conqueror. The enemy team can still
attack and do normal damage, and can still also be the conqueror so the
team members have to be fast.)
**Changes in this PR:**
- GameImpl > conquerPlayer: Transfer ownership of the warships to the
conquerer of their lands. If the conqueror is not a team member (other
team can still attack, in their case with troop loss), they won't get
the warships and the ships will be deleted like normal. If the conqueror
is a team member, have them capture the warships.
(Captures need to happen in conquerPlayer since this is right before the
last tiles are conquered and PlayerExecution finds out the player is
dead and deletes its units. Captures will be recorded in the stats just
like normal. Things like this add an extra incentive to be the fastest
to conquer the AFK player, next to getting their gold which is also
recorded in stats. The normal Event Box messages are also displayed.)
- GameImpl > conquerPlayer: Also transfer Transport Ships. As a note:
the limit of 3 transport ships concurrently out on water for one player,
can be exceeded in this specific case (the boatMaxNumber is only checked
for canBuild via TransportShipUtils, and in the init of a
TransportShipExecution, not for an existing TransportShipExecution with
a changing owner). This keeps the situation even for the team in terms
of ships that are already out to attack, which is fair.
captureUnit/setOwner won't do the full job here though, so changes in
TransportShipExecution are needed.
- TransportShipExecution: Added originalOwner. So we can check within
the execution itself if the Original owner disconnected, and if so if
the new owner is on the same team. Only in that case change private
this.attacker. This.attacker can still not be changed from the outside
in this way. Find new src of new owner to retreat boat to if needed, and
if new owner has no shore set it to null so the boat will be deleted
upon retreat. To find new src tile of new owner, use
bestTransportShipSpawn instead of canBuild because canBuild checks for
max boats = 3 etcera but the boat is already on its way so those checks
don't apply (we could get false back from canBuild because there's 3
ships out, while we only need to find the source tile so use
bestTransportShipSpawn).
- TransportShipUtils: to use bestTransportShipSpawn to find new owner
source tile to retreat to, we need to make sure it can handle a new
owner without shore tiles. When the new owner has no shore tiles
(candidates.length === 0), return false. This way it won't go on to call
MiniAStar which would have SerialAStar error on an empty this.sources
array.
- WarshipExecution: Changed isFriendly. This makes sure we have the
wanted behavior: allied/team ships should not attack each other once one
of their owners goes AFK.
- AttackExecution: added one more test specifically to check if attack
on AFK teammate is still witthout troop loss "Player can attack
disconnected team mate without troop loss". Also a bugfix that I left in
after removing a related change from this PR: Add a check for
removeTroops === false in the retreat() function, so at the end of the
attack we don't add troops back to owner troops if they were never
removed in the init. This check in retreat() is actually a bug fix
because removeTroops is in the constructor and can be set to True, but
in retreat() troops would then have been given back after not being
removed at init.
- DefaultConfig: small addition to comment.
- Disconnected.test.ts: added tests. Added useRealAttackLogic because at
least "Player can attack disconnected team mate without troop loss"
needs to use the real attackLogic.
- TestConfig: new class useRealAttackLogic extends TestConfig class, so
a test setup can use the real attackLogic from DefaultConfig instead of
the mock function in TestConfig.
- Setup.ts: for the test setup, add parameter to accept
useRealAttackLogic extension class. Defaults to TestConfig.
## 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:
tryout33
---------
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
Removed unused code.
PR https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/pull/2044 introduced
function "maybeConsiderBetrayal" in FakeHumanExecution. It was later
replaced by "betray" in BotBehavior, called in a chain of functions
resulting in the behavior that "maybeConsiderBetrayal" originally
intended:
https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/commit/b03f9778dbcada54e0f47232af4cd511a8629980.
## 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:
tryout33
Co-authored-by: Vivacious Box <jon@rouillard.org>
## Description:
> [!IMPORTANT]
> Try here: https://mirv-test.openfront.dev/
> [!NOTE]
> Blocks PRs:
> - #2244
> - #2263
### Summary
Implements intelligent MIRV usage for fakehuman players, enabling them
to make strategic nuclear strikes based on game state analysis.
### Changes
#### Core FakeHuman Strategy (`FakeHumanExecution.ts`)
- **MIRV Decision System**: Added `considerMIRV()` method that evaluates
game state and determines optimal MIRV usage
- **Three Strategic Targeting Modes**:
1. **Counter-MIRV**: Retaliatory strikes against players actively
launching MIRVs at the fakehuman
2. **Victory Denial**: Preemptive strikes against players approaching
win conditions
- Team threshold: n% of total land (configurable)
- Individual threshold: n% of total land (configurable)
3. **Steamroll Prevention**: Strikes against players with dominant city
counts (n% ahead of next competitor)
#### FakeHuman Behavior Tuning
- **Cooldown System**: n-minute cooldown between MIRV attempts
(configurable)
- **Failure Rate**: ~n% chance of cooldown trigger without launch
(simulates human hesitation/resource management; configurable)
- **Territory Targeting**: Centers MIRV strikes on enemy territory
center-of-mass for maximum impact
#### Technical Improvements
- **Type Safety**: Updated `UnitParamsMap` to include `targetTile`
parameter for MIRV units
- **Execution Flow**: Integrated MIRV consideration into fakehuman tick
cycle outside of standard attack logic, due to its holistic strategic
nature
### Game Balance Impact
- **FakeHuman Threat Level**: Increases late-game fakehuman
competitiveness
- **Endgame Dynamics**: Prevents runaway victories, extends game tension
### Breaking Changes
None - purely additive feature
### Related GitHub Issues:
- #2205
------
## Other
- [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
Discord Username: samsammiliah
---------
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
Remove some lines of code that do nothing in surroundedBySamePlayer,
gain a small bit of performance back. The code says "if it is an ocean
shore tile but not an ocean shore tile" which can never be true.
(Why where the lines there and why can they be removed:
Before you were able to boat on a lake, you had no escape from your land
if it bordered a lake and no ocean. So it was logical, if you bordered a
lake with your cluster, to still treat it as fully surrounded annexable
land.
This is why this code was added in [this
commit](https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/commit/ee56d687484131c092599434247b3a036e0e9668)
back then:
`const isOceanShore = this.mg.isOceanShore(tile); if
(this.mg.isShore(tile) && !isOceanShore) { continue; }`
But [this newer
commit](https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/commit/c1383d76f1f76c5e5f9be3a6f30b8f3010258540#diff-fb1101a2b50dd7c353d082ff7a3351cff5469b8249b3ebca91c10573a3dfaaf1)
made it so you could from then on boat on lakes. So you have an escape
from your cluster since then. And just like being on the edge of the map
or when bordering the ocean, this means your cluster won't get annexed.
However, while the updated code for PlayerExecution in the last commit
does its work as intended (it does not exclude lake shore tiles
anymore)... The code contradicts itself:
`const isOceanShore = this.mg.isOceanShore(tile); if
(this.mg.isOceanShore(tile) && !isOceanShore) { continue;}`
Conclusion: the code on lines 136-138 can be deleted because it
literally says "if it is an ocean shore tile but not an ocean shore
tile" which can never be true. Also remove the const and check
isOceanShore directly in the if statement.)
## 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:
tryout33
fixes#2275
Added global Start/Stop trading; use your **player panel** to trigger
it.
<img width="370" height="540" alt="Screenshot 2025-10-23 184447"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c3b7967e-ffdd-4f37-ba67-b60a602278ce"
/>
- [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
regression is found:
abodcraft1
## Description:
fixes#2275
Added global Start/Stop trading; use your **player panel** to trigger
it.
<img width="370" height="540" alt="Screenshot 2025-10-23 184447"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c3b7967e-ffdd-4f37-ba67-b60a602278ce"
/>
## 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
## Description:
Adds a timer before self deleting units
Adds a loading bar under deleting units
Adds a timer in radial menu for clarity purposes
## 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:
Mr.Box
---------
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
When a main cluster is fully surrounded, the surrounding player is able
to attack them (based on AttackLogic in DefaultConfig). But so far
wasn't able to annex them.
Fix: turned around an isFriendly check in PlayerExecution. This way if
this.player is disconnected, they can get annexed, allied/team mate or
not.
This also means that in the edge case of surrounding player going AFK,
the enclosed main cluster can attack the disconnected surrounding player
and maybe fight it's way out of being enclosed.
Meant as hotfix for v26.
Reported here:
https://discord.com/channels/1284581928254701718/1429252618995105923/1429252618995105923
## 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:
tryout33
## Description:
fixes https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/issues/1955
Describe the PR.
Bots previously created requests directly, skipping timeout cleanup and
causing
a stuck “request sent” icon when unhandled. Using
AllianceRequestExecution makes
bots follow the same lifecycle as humans, so requests expire correctly.
## 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:
abodcraft1
---------
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
Adds a max timer setting
The timer starts at max timer and goes down, becoming red if reaching <
1 min
The player with the biggest territory wins at the end of the timer
## 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:
Vivacious Box
---------
Co-authored-by: Loymdayddaud <145969603+TheGiraffe3@users.noreply.github.com>
## Description:
- Fixes#1790
- Fixed the codebase:
- expressions short-circuiting with `&&` changed to proper `if`
statements
- `A instanceof B;` expressions now emit warnings
## 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:
michal7952
---------
Co-authored-by: Evan <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
Players with no ongoing attacks were ignored during cluster calculations
in
https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/commit/3680d9cc1663a22f0e174d2c2de806c0ee78b923
This PR has it fallback to neighbor with largest border if no ongoing
attacks
## 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:
evan
## Description:
1. Create forceSendAttack function so nations expand faster at the start
(their reserve troop ratio was too low, causing them to skip the first
attack
2. modify the perceived cost modifier to reduce the number of defense
posts built.
3. Updated how random land is selected to avoid player.tiles() since
that can be millions of entries.
4. Improve performance of valueFunction by using closestTile and
reducing the number of tiles checked.
5. Nations now launch hydros if they have enough gold.
6. used boundBox instead of bfs because doing a large bfs for h-bombs
can get expensive.
7. Modified perceived multiplayer to remove cap and scale super-linearly
to discourage nations from spamming too many building. Instead they are
more likely to spend that money on nukes.
## 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:
evan
## Description:
Patches issue flagged from
https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/pull/1957#issuecomment-3386398998.
Right now for every single defense post capture, attackers receive two
messages:
- "Your Defense Post was destroyed" and "Captured Defense Post from ..."
By downgrading before captures, behavior will now be:
- defender receives "Your Defense Post was destroyed"
- attacker receives no message unless capturing a lv2+ defense post
(downgraded to lv 1), in which case they receive "Captured Defense Post
from ..."
## 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:
`seekerreturns`
---------
Co-authored-by: evanpelle <evanpelle@gmail.com>
## Description:
Fixes#1685
Continuation from #1924, which was auto-closed after the upstream repo
force-pushed main and I synced my fork.
This change ensures that allies are excluded from the `getMode()` call
made by `getCapturingPlayer()` inside `removeCluster()`.
- Previously, friendly neighbors were treated as candidates for
capturing, leading to incorrect annexations in certain edge cases.
- Added a small efficiency improvement by filtering out non-player and
friendly neighbors up front to reduce total computations down-the-line.
- Important: we can’t simply check if the `getMode(neighborsIDs)` result
is a friendly. Doing so would cause the territory to go to nobody until
the user is attacked. I believe the expected behavior is the largest
neighboring enemy should take it automatically.
Here's an example of the new behavior in an extreme edge case:
<img width="622" height="422" alt="Screenshot 2025-08-24 at 4 56 46 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c5dd9c0d-0a3c-4657-8154-e114fa920689"
/>
## 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:
nottirb
## Description:
Closes https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/issues/1619.
On capture, defense posts will be downgraded.
On the live version this means defense posts will be destroyed, as
defense posts can only be level 1.
Misc. changes:
- added `decreaserLevel` helper
- cleaned up if/else in tick unit loop for clarity to avoid yet another
nested layer
Continuation of the stale PR,
https://github.com/openfrontio/OpenFrontIO/pull/1622.
## 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:
Discord username: `seekerreturns`
Betrayal was being considered too early (inside shouldAttack), causing
alliances to break before calling attackChance.
- [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
regression is found:
abodcraft1
## Description:
In #1860, some unused code was left behind. Remove the unused code.
## 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
## Description:
Simplify nation enemy selection to make nations more likely to launch
nukes.
Partially fixes#1855 by addressing a v24 regression in nation behavior.
## 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
FloPinguin