Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: December 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: RFC: Layers Patch
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: RFC: Layers Patch

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Jason Short <jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, freeciv-dev <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: RFC: Layers Patch
From: Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 05:05:34 -0800 (PST)

--- Jason Short <jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-12-15 at 07:13, Raahul Kumar wrote:
> > 
> > --- Jason Short <jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > A unit in "port" should be considered in the LAND layer, not in their
> > > native layer.  For instance a bomber in a city/airfield is on the
> > > ground, and a ship in port.
> > > 
> > > How this relates to portattacks I can't say.
> > 
> > Interesting. Currently I have not changed the normal Freeciv way of what
> > happens to units inside cities/fortresses/airbases. 
> 
> Interesting.  I see code to check for is_same_layer, and I'd assumed an
> exception would be needed for city/airbase combat.  But I am not
> familiar with this code.

It's not needed. All that is handled in kill_unit() in unittools.c. If you wish
greater insight, read the source.

> A question: what about units in transport?  Does this mean a ship
> attacking a caravel carrying a land unit will not killstack the land
> unit?  What would happen if it didn't?

All transported units die with the transporter. Obviously we cannot have a 
land unit stranded on an ocean square ; ). I have not changed the Freeciv
default where it makes sense.

> What if a bomber attacks a carrier carrying fighters?  Are the fighters
> all considered "in the air" while the carrier is "in the sea"?  This
> seems unrealistic.  But I can't really think of a better solution.

Yes! Because Fighters can escape from a sinking aircraft carrier, but a tank
is not suddenly going to tread water. 

Take this piece of advice with a large Siberian salt mine, because I may not
have implemented this in the patch I sent to the list. 

> > The argument exists that non Anti Aircraft units should be easy meat for
> > planes. So only the Aegis should even have a def value against planes. 
> 
> This should be a ruleset issue: just up the attack strength of planes. 
> But perhaps AA should then be more than a factor of 2 improvement?

Not sure yet. I think I'll wait until Ben's AC patches are in before messing
with the rulesets.

> jason

Aloha,
RK.

An attorney was defending his client against a charge of first-degree
murder.  "Your Honor, my client is accused of stuffing his lover's
mutilated body into a suitcase and heading for the Mexican border.
Just north of Tijuana a cop spotted her hand sticking out of the
suitcase.  Now, I would like to stress that my client is *not* a
murderer.  A sloppy packer, maybe..."

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


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