[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4242) Clean up the goto route network protocol and route execution

["Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 16 May 2003, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > > Hmm. Instead of sending a hard 'wait', why not mark dangers and let the
> > > > server sort out the waiting? This way we don't screw up if the server 
> > > > sits
> > > > on some information we don't have. Probably harder to code, though.
> > ...
> > > do you want that the client sends the server a path and a set of
> > > dangerous tiles and the server figures out the waiting?
> >
> > Yes. The client sends the server a path where the dangerous tiles are
> > marked. I don't know if this is feasible, though.
>
> And what is the advantage?

Let's say a piece of road in your path, which covered by FoW, has been
pillaged. This means you just lost 3, not 1, MP. When you reach the first
series of dangerous tiles, you (the client) thought you could pass, but in
reality you can't. So you should have stopped.

Of course, we can just call this a causalty to FoW. I doubt it will be a
common occurance.

  - Per