Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: August 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: movement
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: movement

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Freeciv developers <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: movement
From: Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 15:07:21 +0200

On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 12:27:41PM +0000, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Christian Knoke wrote:
> > > > > But then it means every unit can move 2 tiles on the road plus one
> > > > > off-road per turn. The advantage of alpine troops is reduced. The 
> > > > > diffi-
> > > > > culty of terrain changes, i.e. mountains are much easier to climb on.
> 
> That is not good.
> 
> > > >  If with movement points left, you attempt a move for which you lack
> > > >  the points, you remain in place but your remaining points are
> > > >  committed towards the completion of the move.  At the beginning of
> > > >  your next turn, the points committed toward the move are combined
> > > >  with enough new points to take the move.
> ...
> > > > (We would probably retain the exception that all of your movement
> > > > points are sufficient to move you one space - so warriors in the
> > > > mountains can always move one square per turn.)

> How about (simpler version): You must either have sufficient movement to
> enter a piece of terrain, or, you must use _all_ your movement to do so.
> Attempting to move into terrain with insufficient moves drains all your
> movement.

This is the current rule.

> This way we don't need to implement the "automatic move at beginning of
> turn" part, which I don't like.

Do you agree that it the fairest so far? The second fairest IMHO is
the current one.

> > > > Thus units would not be getting cheap moves all over the place, which
> > > > would keep the differences between unit types as important as now; but
> > > > since the rule is absolutely deterministic, things are easier for
> > > > players and AI, points are never wasted, and moves always occur as
> > > > players expect them to.
> > >
> > > I like this one. You basically save your point into the next turn but
> > > the points are task-bound so you can't exploit it.
> 
> That only makes sense if you save them across more than one turn. Eg if we
> implemented "you can only move every second turn with a warrior over
> mountains", or some such. With the given exception, the complexity
> suggested is unwarranted.

The current capping rule from above still applied. You can only save
points this way if you haven't full points.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  reality.sys corrupt. Reboot Universe? (y,n,q)


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