Merge lp://staging/~widelands-dev/widelands/empire04_bugfix into lp://staging/widelands

Continuous integration builds have changed state:

Travis build 3573. State: passed. Details: https://travis-ci.org/widelands/widelands/builds/386821126.
Appveyor build 3376. State: success. Details: https://ci.appveyor.com/project/widelands-dev/widelands/build/_widelands_dev_widelands_empire04_bugfix-3376.

I have done a playtest going the cooperative route. All worked well. No more yellow people going around roadsystem as it was before and the temple fitted well into the economy. No other problems detected. If someone would like to test the non cooperative route (i.e. attacking the temple) that would be appreciated.

1 nit, not tested

Continuous integration builds have changed state:

Travis build 3579. State: passed. Details: https://travis-ci.org/widelands/widelands/builds/387947458.
Appveyor build 3382. State: failed. Details: https://ci.appveyor.com/project/widelands-dev/widelands/build/_widelands_dev_widelands_empire04_bugfix-3382.

Continuous integration builds have changed state:

Travis build 3610. State: passed. Details: https://travis-ci.org/widelands/widelands/builds/391986964.
Appveyor build 3412. State: success. Details: https://ci.appveyor.com/project/widelands-dev/widelands/build/_widelands_dev_widelands_empire04_bugfix-3412.

Can't do any testing for the next 2 weeks.
I don't like to approve my own work.
But from my perspective this is mature to be merged

I tested it (both paths) and I found it to be a mature improvement. A few points:

- I would like a tiny battle to take place, instead of conquering through a mere touch.

- The following comment doesn't reflect what actually happens:

"remove all workers from p3 to avoid having them wandering around"

They still wander around. That's not too bad, but their number should be smaller.

- I would like the curse to target a different type of building each time.

hm when I tested the cooperative way I had maximum 1 or 2 workers going around after the buildings switched sides to blue. When it is conquered there should actually be a lot of them as intended. This happens normally if you conquer/destroy a warehouse doesn't it. are you sure there are much of them in the cooperative scenario?

about the battle this would be possible how much soldiers should be garrisoned in the monastery? 2 maybe 3? Remember we removed the sentry also for having a more peaceful look of the monastery.

The curse is targeting different buildings. It determines the type of building the player has most of and takes one of them.

thanks for testing

My bad. I thought that the code-comment was for both paths. There is no crowd in the cooperative way.

So my own comment was about the conquering. I would expect less people in a monastery, especially if some of them get killed during the attack. Or you could make it so as most of them to be female workers. As about the number of defenders, I think 3 is fine.

Concerning the curse, normally the player will rebuild the lost building. But then the same building gets targeted, so it gets boring after the first time. Maybe after each fire you could remove the chosen building-type from the list.

Okay I will add 3 soldiers to the temple of vesta to give a little fight.

probably I could implement mor randomness in the curse as well.

Its difficult to mreduce the workers though cause carriers are recruited automatically in a warehouse. Perhaps I can try to fiddle with target economy settings to reduce this number but I am not sure.

Anyhow this will have to wait for at least 2 weeks as I am on holiday for this period with no access to my computer.

Let's have it now - the additional fix ideas can always be implemented in a follow-up branch.

Thanks for testing! :)

@bunnybot merge