[Freeciv-Dev] Re: autosettler cleans pollution more

[Jeff Mallatt <jjm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 2000/06/18 17:42 , Andy Black wrote:
>At 10:30 AM -0400 6/18/2000, Jeff Mallatt wrote:
>[snip]
>>Except for pollution caused by being nuked.  However, I don't want the AIs
>>to aggressively clean-up nuke pollution: a friend pointed out that making
>>the AIs clean up nuke pollution makes nuking them a great way of wasting
>>their Settlers/Engineers.  I don't want to make nukes attractive to use, so
>>I'm thinking of adding a different kind of pollution, S_FALLOUT, that acts
>>just like S_POLLUTION in game terms, but that the AI doesn't aggressively
>>clean-up.
>Wasn't there something earlier on the list about the difference betwene
>regular and neuclear polution?
>I belive a thought that had been given was neuclear fallout is harder to
>clean up than regular messes and takes much more time.  It also requires
>advanced technology.
>Proposal:
>       Implement above sugestion.
>       In adition, make cleanup of neuclear polution take longer (same
>amount of time as teraforming?),

Longer, but probably not that much longer (3 -vs- 24 ?).

>and require units that can do so to have a
>flag F_NUKE_CLEANUP.

Sure.

>       neuclear polution could
>               cause damage to ground units present/cleaning it up
>               spread (slowly) due to incoming/outgoing objects
>               co-exist with regular polution (double trouble--ugh)

Hum.  I want to try to make it UNattractive to drop a nuke.

The same friend who pointed out the nuke-to-waste settlers strategy
suggested Nuclear Winter as a consequence of Fallout (since this hurts the
attacker, also, it is a kind of deterrent).  Nuclear Winter is sort of like
Global Warming, but in the opposite direction (and, they are independent).
With enough heavy industry and nuke-offs, the entire planet could wind up
being only desert/swamp/tundra/glacier!

>Due the the feature freze, implmentation should be delayed until the next
>version.

Yup.

jjm