[Freeciv-Dev] Re: units.ruleset docu patch 2
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 05:36:03PM -0800, Raahul Kumar wrote:
> This is implemented in a very annoying way. Phalanx obsolete warriors, but
> Pikemen do not. Since Pikemen obsolete phalanx, and phalanx obsolete warriors,
> gaining feudalism should result in the removal of warriors. This really annoys
> me!
Yes. What has been discussed before (but I can't find it in the archives) is
the case
where you can build Pikemen, but uyou do not have the tech for Phalanx. It was
argued
that in this case, your Warriors should not be upgradeable to Pikemen.
> Basically, I would like like to see some intelligence in deciding if units
> are
> obsolete. If A is made obsolete by B, and B is made obsolete by C, if you gain
> the ability to build C, A should also be made obsolete.
It was concluded (in that discussion) that this should not happen.
--
Reinier
- [Freeciv-Dev] units.ruleset docu patch 2, Per I. Mathisen, 2002/03/14
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: units.ruleset docu patch 2, Raahul Kumar, 2002/03/14
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: units.ruleset docu patch 2,
Reinier Post <=
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: units.ruleset docu patch 2, Raahul Kumar, 2002/03/15
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: units.ruleset docu patch 2, Jason Short, 2002/03/15
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: units.ruleset docu patch 2, Raahul Kumar, 2002/03/15
- [Freeciv-Dev] nontransitive obsolescence (was: units.ruleset docu patch 2), Reinier Post, 2002/03/15
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: nontransitive obsolescence (was: units.ruleset docu patch 2), Raahul Kumar, 2002/03/15
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: nontransitive obsolescence (was: units.ruleset docu patch 2), Reinier Post, 2002/03/16
- [Freeciv-Dev] Re: nontransitive obsolescence (was: units.ruleset docu patch 2), Raahul Kumar, 2002/03/16
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: units.ruleset docu patch 2, Per I. Mathisen, 2002/03/15
|
|