Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: April 2000:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: patch: split up F_SUBMARINE (PR#347)
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: patch: split up F_SUBMARINE (PR#347)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: patch: split up F_SUBMARINE (PR#347)
From: Jeff Mallatt <jjm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 12:39:44 -0400

At 2000/04/24 08:06 , David Pfitzner wrote:
>The unit flag F_SUBMARINE currently incorporates several effects.
>For alternate rulesets it may be useful to have these effects
>separately, so this patch splits F_SUBMARINE into:
>
>  F_SUBMARINE_INVIS - invisibility effect (usefulness reduced by fog, 
>               but still some effect vs cities and visibility-2 units);
>  F_MISSILE_CARRIER - transport_capacity is for F_MISSILE units only;
>  F_NO_LAND_ATTACK  - cannot attack vs land (no shore bombardment).
>
>This patch makes a reasonable attempt at backward compatibility 
>(non-mandatory cap str) including reading old ruleset files.  
>(It fails (only in minor ways?) for non-standard rulesets using 
>new flags above -- too bad, we'll probably have another +cap
>soon enough anyway.)

I did some quick tests, and this all seems to work.

One minor nit-pick: in the flag_names[] array you use underscores, whereas
all previously existing names use intercaps.

At 2000/04/24 08:18 , David Pfitzner wrote:
>David Pfitzner wrote:
>
>> this patch splits F_SUBMARINE into:
>> 
>>   F_SUBMARINE_INVIS - invisibility effect (usefulness reduced by fog, 
>>              but still some effect vs cities and visibility-2 units);
>
>On second thoughts (sorry), should probably call this, eg, 
>F_PARTIAL_INVIS, to be more general.  (I didn't want to call it 
>F_INVISIBILITY since one could consider the possibility of units 
>which were "fully" invisible (Civ CFP?))

Hum...  I might be tempted to leave it F_SUBMARINE_INVIS, because the
invisibility of this kind of unit results from a specific cause: it's under
water (i.e. sub-marine!).  I could envision separate F_STEALTH_INVIS or
F_CAMOUFLAGE_INVIS.  A new unit that could go on land or under water and
that would have F_SUBMARINE_INVIS, would derive the benefit only when under
water; it would be normally visible when on land.

I realize that to implement this concept correctly, one would have to check
the terrain type, which means a few mods to your patch.

jjm




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