[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Glaciars: what happens after they leave

[Jason Todd <idjason@xxxxxxxx>]

 One thing though, how do you make a city standing but empty?
Would this mean that you change the city code so that a city
can exist with zero population but while keeping it's
improvements? Also would this happen if you totally destroyed
a city, as in keeping the improvements?

Anecdoter@xxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 1/5/00 1:09:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, idjason@xxxxxxxx
> writes:
> 
> >  I was thinking about what happens to squares after a glaciar
> >  leaves. So here it is... A square can't possibly be unchaged
> >  after a glaciar. A forest can't remain a forest, etc. So
> >  mountains should become hills, forests and grasslands should
> >  become plains, plains should stay the same, but as a bonus
> >  deserts should become plains too due to the increase in
> >  good stuff in the soil left by the glaciar. As for huts, they
> >  should stay. Now for specials and rivers; rivers, IMHO should
> >  stay the way they were, but specials should be randomly created
> >  at the same level as the server is set.
> 
>     I agree with you. However, I think that previous cities should be left
> standing, but empty.  Therefore, as the glacier receeds, the players could
> make up for what was lost before.  Of course, it would be one big free for
> all. but I think that is what is so good about the idea.  It has the
> potential to completly change the entire balance of a game.   Strong players
> become weak, and vice versa.
> 
> Steve