[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#2565) Plural form needed for unit types

["Jason Short via RT" <rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

[rfalke - Thu Jan  9 14:41:23 2003]:

> On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 04:17:50AM -0800, Guest via RT wrote:
> > 
> > Raimar Falke via RT <rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > > And the patch. 
> > > 
> > > Erik: last chance to object.
> > 
> > I take that chance.
> > 
> > 
> > > -      notify_player(pplayer, _("Game: %d %s upgraded to %s for %d
> > gold."),
> > > -                    number_of_upgraded_units,
> > unit_types[from_unittype].name,
> > > -                    unit_types[to_unittype].name,
> > > -                    cost * number_of_upgraded_units);
> > > +      notify_player(pplayer,
> > > +     PL_("Game: %d unit of %s upgraded to %s for %d gold.",
> > > + "Game: %d units of %s upgraded to %s for %d gold.",
> > > + number_of_upgraded_units), number_of_upgraded_units,
> > > +     unit_types[from_unittype].name,
> > > +     unit_types[to_unittype].name,
> > > +     cost * number_of_upgraded_units);
> > 
> > This produces messages like
> > "Game: 1 unit of legion upgraded to ..."
> > "Game: 1 unit of carrier upgraded to ..."
> 
> What do you think if this is changed to
> 
> "Game: 1 unit of type legion upgraded to ..."
> "Game: 1 unit of type carrier upgraded to ..."

Sounds ugly, but both are grammatically correct I think.

> > The fundamental problem is that some units have names that belong to a
> > component of that unit ("settling unit"/"settler"). This needs to be
> > handled in 1 of 2 ways.
> 
> > 1. Change the unit names so that they all refer to the whole unit, not
> > to a component. For example change "settler" to something like "settling
> > unit", "colonizing group", "settling team", ....
> 
> This makes the unit names longer. Too long and too complicated
> IMHO. Just think what a civ2 player who sees freeciv for the first
> time says: "why is a "settlers" called "colonizing group" in freeciv? 
> And our answer would be "because to correct the grammatic of an
> upgrade message"?! No. This suggestion is even worse than the one
> which was to specify singular and plural for all units.

Indeed.

One alternative would be to have a "short form" and a "long form".  The
long form has singular and plural.  So we have for instance:

Short: "settlers"
Long singular: "unit of settlers"
Long plural  : "units of settlers"

Short: "legion"
Long singular: "legion"
Long plural:   "legions"

which I think can be done without hurting gameplay, but takes a lot of
work.  But I'm not entirely sure it would work...

> > 2. Make the ruleset indicate wether the unit name refers to the whole
> > unit or a component. Change all code that produces messages about units
> > to have 2 versions. For example "Game: %d %s upgraded to %s for %d
> > gold."/"Game: %d units of %s upgraded to %s for %d gold."
> 
> The cost-value ratio is IMHO very bad.

Unless we make this "ruleset" indicator itself be a translatable string
(ugly! ugly!), it won't necessarily be correct under all languages.

> > I prefer the 1st way. And I would like plural forms for unit types. I
> > don't think the upgrade message should be changed before those issues
> > have been fixed.

I have yet to see an explanation of how plural forms can be introduced
while supporting all languages and not hurting overall gameplay.

jason