[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2415) autoattack patch

["Thomas Strub via RT" <rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 11:03:28AM -0800, Raimar Falke via RT wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 04:10:51AM -0800, Per I. Mathisen via RT wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 26 Nov 2002, Raimar Falke via RT wrote:
> > > > Changes:
> > > > - autoattack now controlled by old autoattack menu & key, and is a
> > > > separate activity like sentry and fortify
> > ...
> > > The previous patch was server-side always auto attack for all
> > > units. And how we have client interaction? Please don't be so terse.
> > 
> > You must set a unit to ACTIVITY_AUTO_ATTACK in the client for the
> > server-side autoattack to work. You can do this with the "A" key or the
> > "Autoattack" menu item, and the unit gets an "A" logo.
> 
> This doesn't answer the questions I have. You last patch was server
> only. Right? Why is this patch now with client interaction? The last
> patch (while it changes the rules in a heavy way) was clean, fair and
> simple. So why did you do the change?

Ok, you want to know why some players want to have the possibility to
remove the autoattack status from some units.

1. is stacks. I have different units and some units have low chances to
win. I want that the strong units can attack.

2. Until a cease-fire without embassy is enabled its not possible to
stop war.

3. Whats with a submarine with 8 cruise misseles? Should the sub attack?
I don't think so. There are 8 other units which can attack.

4. There are situation where i don't like to loose units because the
autoattackalgorithm isn't perfect.

Can we have different autoattack algorithms where the player can
choose from?

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Strub  ***  eMail ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Nur weil das Aufzeichnen, Kopieren und Schnüffeln bei elektronischem 
Datenverkehr leichter als bei der klassischen Post ist, darf man es nicht
einfach tun.