Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: April 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] [1.5] cleanup of proccess_*_want() (PR#1295)
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] [1.5] cleanup of proccess_*_want() (PR#1295)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx, bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [PATCH] [1.5] cleanup of proccess_*_want() (PR#1295)
From: Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 13:56:17 +0200

Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 06:15:48AM CEST, I got a letter,
where Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx> told me, that...
> > > ===================================================================
> > > [...]
> > > +        /* FIXME? We've bigger desire for land units when city walls can
> > > +         * protect them (?). */
> > > +        if (walls && move_type == LAND_MOVING) {
> > > +          desire *= pcity->ai.wallvalue;
> > > +          /* TODO: More use of POWER_FACTOR ! */
> > > +          desire /= POWER_FACTOR;
> > > +        }
> > > 
> > > Well, it's better to build defenders which will go well with existing 
> > > structures, isn't it?  I think there is nothing to fix here.
> > 
> > IMHO we should rather increase desire for city walls when building land
> > defenders.. but maybe it wouldn't work so well in the grand scheme of
> > things..
> > I can't see what Raahul thought that was wrong with that anymore.. ;)) He
> > ellegantly skipped this when replying.. :^)
> 
> This is just simply wrong! We should be selecting units regardless of having
> city walls. City walls only mater when we are on the defensive.

Hey, we're in proccess_defender_want().

> > I'm a bit confused from this all, thus current comment is:
> > 
> >         /* Bonus of Citywalls can be expressed as * 3, and vulnerability is
> >          * quadratic, thus we multiply it by 9. */
> > 
> > I hope it's correct finally :).
> 
> Greg's explanation in his email to me is far better. Use that comment instead.

Extended that a bit, also with added note about genimpr.

Attached hopefully final version of this cleanup. It's _NOT_ autogames-tested
yet, though, I wait until someone will resurrect official CVS and fix the
PR#UNASSIGNED_YET ;).

-- 
 
                                Petr "Pasky" Baudis
 
* ELinks maintainer                * IPv6 guy (XS26 co-coordinator)
* IRCnet operator                  * FreeCiv AI hacker
.
Teamwork is essential -- it allows you to blame someone else.
.
Public PGP key && geekcode && homepage: http://pasky.ji.cz/~pasky/

Attachment: want.patch
Description: Text document


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