[Freeciv-Dev] Re: movement

[Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 15 Aug 2002, Anthony J. Stuckey wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 14, 2002 at 07:28:27PM -0500, Jason Short wrote:
> > Oh yeah :-).  The list then becomes
> > 
> > 0 - A move that takes too many movement points will always be completed.
> > 1 - A move that takes too many movement points will never be completed.
> > 2 - Unused movement points get saved for next turn.
> > 3 - Moves that take too many movement points are not completed, but the
> >      movement points will carry over for the same move next turn.
> > 4 - A move that takes too many movement points will be completed, but
> >      the extra movement points will be taken from the next turn's moves.
> > 
> > ...and...
> > 
> > 0 - No move can take more than a unit's maximum number of moves.
> > 1 - (the opposite - won't work well except with 0 and 4 above).
> > 
> > This is a *lot* of different options to support, but it might be a good 
> > list from which to vote.
> 
>       0 is clearly a bad option.  It allows some serious excesses.  As far as
> I can tell, the only argument in it's favor is that it's consistent with
> the "attacking a tile with a unit that has too few movement points to
> unconditionally move there is still allowed" rule.
>       1 is somewhat better, although it penalizes behavior that is moderately
> useful.
> 
>       2, 3, and 4 are all variants of the middle ground between 0 and 1.
> 
>       0, 1, and 2 are the easiest to code and understand.  A minor grace.
> 
>       2 still allows excesses.
> 
>       Is there anybody who is deeply opposed to the behavior of 1?

I am quite deeply opposed to the behaviour of 2,3,4, since I prefer 
the turns to be independent.

Out of 0 and 1 I prefer 0, since that was done to civIII and was quite 
smooth, but maybe I am wrong and 1 is smoother.

Best,
G.