newfrenchy83

> That explanation is pretty incoherent but I think the idea is that _not_ using a priority makes the ability give a different effect depending on how the units are...

> > Although it's true that there's no natural ordering to damage types, I don't think it's unreasonable to set a default > > Well it also applies only to...

> > Also I really don't think the priority by type is needed, in particular since there is no naural order to attacktypes. > > Although it's true that there's...

> I think this is a good idea. But > > > it's done. > > Now you have the same issue but on a lower scale (0.1 instead of...

@stevecotton , @CelticMinstrel I modified the rules of priorities to take into account the unequal number unit/attack_alignment of different or identical alignment that there can be for a unit.

@stevecotton , @CelticMinstrel I don't want to rush you but this PR has been open for 4 months and I still don't know what your intentions are. Could you take...

> I would say I am fairly ambivalent about this feature. I don't mind it being in the game, but I'm not eager to see it added either. > >...

@CelticMinstrel i added cumulative attribute to [attack_alignment] for what tod_bonus of weapon could be added to tod_bonus unit_alignment or unit type alignment, and not systematicelly replace them.

> It looks like you added a function that already exists – `modification_count` is already defined. Also, you consistently misspelled "length", but that doesn't really matter so much because you...

> I don't think I have any remaining objections here… we should add something like this to the Lua API too, but that can be done separately, as we probably...