Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-data: October 2000:
[freeciv-data] PATCH: Customizable combat rules. Please test.
Home

[freeciv-data] PATCH: Customizable combat rules. Please test.

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: freeciv-data@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [freeciv-data] PATCH: Customizable combat rules. Please test.
From: Martin Olveyra <bj0v@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 03:46:23 -0300
Reply-to: freeciv-data@xxxxxxxxxxx

For now, with this patch you can customize the following combat rules (read
game.ruleset):  
        - killstack. This modifier allows to change the unit stack behavior when
one of the unit is killed: destroy all the units in the same tile or destroy
only the attacked one.
        - deathfight. This modifier allows to regulate the damage that can be
dealt to both units in an attack. Even if this modifier is low enough, both
units can survive in an attack. Note that the cost of units must be higher in
that case, to prevent unit proliferation!. My intend with this option is to
manage with less number of units than in the standard rule, in order to give
more importance to logistics in the player strategy.

Interested please test this patch in order to make adjustements to the value of
deathfight and the cost of units, and make me suggestions (even in the naming
of such option, I am not good english speaker ;-)) . This modifications are the
first in a series of ones I plan to do with combat rules customization, so I
need your suggestions in this topic.

**************
Note for maintainers: the structure packet_unit_combat (common/packets.h) has a
field named make_winner_veteran, which is never used (only it is assigned a
value in the function handle_unit_attack_request (server/unithand.c). May be
someone plan to use it in the future. Should this field be removed?


-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Listar --
-- Type: text/x-c
-- File: mod.patch




[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]