[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Chunnel
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
On Fri, Mar 24, 2000 at 05:02:00PM +0100, Reinier Post wrote:
> I don't think underwater roads or cities are a good idea, but bridges are
> interesting, because they would be vulnerable. (Bombers must be able to
> destroy them, for instance.)
In Civ:CTP, underwater tunnels are not vulnerable to attacks by bombers,
but they are subject to being pillaged by sea units. Moreover, if a
section of tunnel is pillaged, it destroys any land units which happen
to be in the tunnel, presumably because the tunnel gets flooded.
--
-Sean Connor (sec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
(sec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
(sec@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence that it
is not utterly absurd; indeed, in view of the silliness of the
majority of mankind, a widespread belief is more often likely to be
foolish than sensible.
-- Bertrand Russell
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Chunnel, Alexandre BERAUD, 2000/03/24
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Chunnel, Cameron Morland, 2000/03/24
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Chunnel, Greg Wooledge, 2000/03/24
- [Freeciv-Dev] Land Reclamation (was: Chunnel), Cameron Morland, 2000/03/25
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Land Reclamation (was: Chunnel), Cameron Morland, 2000/03/25
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Land Reclamation (was: Chunnel), Stephen Hodge, 2000/03/25
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Land Reclamation (was: Chunnel), Thue Janus Kristensen, 2000/03/25
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Land Reclamation (was: Chunnel), David Pfitzner, 2000/03/25
|
|