[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Goto avoids empty enemy city (PR#1239)

["Ross W. Wetmore" <rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with you and Daniel that movement should not go through enemy
cities, empty or not.

You don't always want to create an enemy by trashing a city in transit
even if Freeciv doesn't really understnad why.

You can't tell if it will be occupied by the time you get there, and 
this could be fatal.

Since road and rail effects are removed with city destruction you also 
need to start adding special cases for size, or the possibility that 
others may do the transit thing as well.

Territorial integrity should be built in constraints for movement rules
as opposed to attack rules.

Cheers,
RossW
=====

At 11:09 AM 02/01/24 +0000, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> --- Christian Knoke <ChrisK@xxxxxxxx> wrote: 
>> Maybe, but I don't think so. Goto is a command to find the shortest
>> way, not to protect the user from him/herself. When I have two empty
>> enemy cities in reach I know for sure what to do.
>
>If the majority agrees that it is a bug, it's trivial to fix:
>change 0 to 1 in
>http://www.freeciv.org/lxr/source/client/goto.c?v=cvs#L365
>
>But I agree with Daniel here, conquering cities on the way is wrong.
>Those who wrote goto.c (Thue adapted it from gotohand, I believe) were of
>the same opinion if they added this special clause.
>
>And goto code does try to propose a more sensible route, not just a
>shortest route.
>
>G.
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Everything you'll ever need on one web page
>from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
>http://uk.my.yahoo.com