Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: March 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: units.ruleset docu patch 2

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: units.ruleset docu patch 2

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: units.ruleset docu patch 2
From: Jason Short <vze2zq63@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 06:56:29 -0500
Reply-to: jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Raahul Kumar wrote:
--- Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

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.

I'm not quite clear on what the argument could possibly be. I see no possible
reason to build warriors over pikemen.

That's not the argument, as I understand it.

The argument is that since you haven't researched phalanx, there is no upgrade path from warriors to pikemen. So although you would never want to build warriors anymore, they're not really "obsolete" since this implies "upgradeable".

I'd argue that they should be made "obsolete" so that they cannot be built anymore, but not be upgradeable since there is no upgrade path. But this is probably not worth the effort.


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