Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: February 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] aiunit.c ai_military_findvictim() cleanup (PR#
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] aiunit.c ai_military_findvictim() cleanup (PR#

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Gregory Berkolaiko <gberkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx, bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] aiunit.c ai_military_findvictim() cleanup (PR#1264)
From: Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 04:02:55 -0800 (PST)

--- Gregory Berkolaiko <gberkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I suspect the idea of patt is to force punit to attack a stack of units
> if they are endangering punit, even if they are not that weak...

So this is the reason that the ai makes senseless attacks. Any change of
convincing the AI not to attack veteran fortified mech inf on mountains any
time soon ?



> How about writing a separate function 
> > > consider_pillaging(x, y, punit) ?
> > > in general, not only barbarians should pillage.
> > 
> > Is it used anywhere else?
> 
> could be but I don't think so.
> but it shouldn't stop you IMO

Making AI units pillage roads and railroads could be a very bad idea. The AI
might never succeed in taking cities if it pillages roads/railroads along the
way.

> 
> I think we should make many small functions with good names, like
> consider_defending_town, consider_pillaging, consider_hut_poaching and
> has_passangers.

I think you meant has_passengers.



> Somehow I like it more.  Don't really know why.
> BTW, there is still one apetency lurking...
> 

Apetency?


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
http://sports.yahoo.com


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