Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: February 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3551) New IBM Nuke
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3551) New IBM Nuke

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#3551) New IBM Nuke
From: "Rafa³ Bursig" <bursig@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 10:13:36 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dnia 2003.02.27 18:06 Per I. Mathisen napisa³(a):
> 
> On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, Rafal Bursig wrote:
> > > andi payn wrote code for an unlimited move ICBM missile unit. I
> didn't
> > > like unlimited movement, so I suggested doing unlimited paradrop
> > > instead,
> > > which I think he agreed to. Nothing happened after that. I still
> think
> > > that is a better idea.
> > >
> >   I think that ICMB shouldn't be a unit (which can be moved form
> city
> > to city ) only staticaly city improvment ( one per city ) with big
> > unkeep cost. Which will be destroyed when you lanch missle and nuke
> > explosion will be instantly after lanch (if victim target doesn't
> have
> > defence)
> 
> That opens up two cans of worms: Player activation of (quite complex)
> building effects and building of multiple buildings of the same type.
> I'm
> against both, since they complicate an already simple and elegant
> concept.
> 
> If you don't want it be able to move, just make it a zero movement
> unit.
> 
> In any case, the support code for what you are suggesting simply isn't
> there.
> 
In this case only one silo of ICBM per city.

I simple don't think that this should be unit becouse we have one nuke 
as unit.
It is nonsnense have 2 nuke units.

And you mean someone must make some work to implement it. Yes that true 
but if you don't put new things then you will have stagnation :)

Rafal




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