[Freeciv-Dev] Re: suggestion / idea

[Thue Janus Kristensen <thue105@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 31 Jan 2000, you wrote:> I was just thinking about the whole ships and 
city walls...
> A ship would ignore a city wall to... If my idea of what the ships are is
> right, a large number of cannons (and very big cannons at that), a
> city wall or even a fortress would not be much use. That is why there
> is a costal defense upgrade. With a few costal defenses placed in cities 
> with a few musketeer, ships are not nearly as powerful,  a
> few musketeers can stop a very large number of ironclads (can't they K =))
> and they cost less.... The only problem is that is takes metallurgy to
> build a costal defense upgrade....

Now I know some of you like to quote the civ II manual, but nobody said we
couldn't improve on civ. Ships are too powerfull, so why don't we fx:
-Make coastal fortress available earlier, fx with gunpowder.
-Give ships a penalty when attacking land units
-Implement a bombart mode like in "Sid Meiers Alpha Centauri", ie ships can
bombart without fear of retaliation, but units damaged are only hurt, not
destroyed. This is my preference, as it is also more realistic.(you can't
destroy all troops just by bombarding). I SMAC some ground units could bombart
too, enabling them to retaliate. It will still make it much easier for the land
troops to invade.

If you insist of following the civ2 rules you could just use the civ2 ruleset.
Note that the mighty sid himself changed the rules for ships in the sequal to
civ2 (SMAC) :)

> I think Ships should ignore City walls really. That would match up with
> histroy... ships have always been used to pummel a cities.
> 
> p.s. An AEGIS Cruiser is one of those cruiser that were used in WWII
> That had massive amounts of Rockets yes? Shouldn't they have a slightly
> larger attack... they were used for destroying entire cites weren't they?
> 
> p.s.s. What does AEGIS stand for? =)
> Darth bob