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

[Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx>]

--- Jason Short <vze2zq63@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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. 

I fully agree with your proposal. The alternative is to make bronze
working(pre-req for phalanx) one of the pre-reqs for pikemen. This neatly
solves the entire issue.

> But this is probably not worth the effort.
> 
> jason
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
http://sports.yahoo.com/