Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: May 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2581) Layers proposal redux

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2581) Layers proposal redux

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#2581) Layers proposal redux
From: "Gregory Berkolaiko" <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 08:28:11 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Wed, 28 May 2003, Davide Pagnin wrote:

> On Wed, 2003-05-28 at 16:18, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 May 2003, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> > 
> > Note, that the pure layers redux proposal allowed full Civ12 compatibility 
> > (including all idiotic features like bombers falling out of sky when the 
> > Mech Inf under it is killed).  All you had to do is to put everything into 
> > one layer.
> Well, there are 2 options:
> 1. I have not understood at all Per's proposal
> 2. You're wrong
> So, supposed that the first statement is true, I will submit some
> example and you can explain me how they will work with Per Layer Redux
> idea:
> a) A tile containing a bomber and a mech. inf. is attacked by an armor.
> Civ[12] will stop you and say "Only fighter can attack air unit"
> b) A tile containing a bomber and a mech. inf is attacked by a fighter
> Civ[12] will allow you attacking but chose mech. inf. as best defender,
> in the event you win both mech. inf. and bomber are destroyed.
> How can those 2 examples be resolved (with 100% compatibility) with Per
> Layers Redux? (By selecting bomber, fighter, armor and mech. inf. all in
> the same layers, btw)

In civ12 rulesets you set all units' layers to the same value.
And change this rule:

 - You cannot attack a tile if your own layer contains one or more units
but you cannot attack any of them. (Layer superiority rule.)


-..-..-..-.. but you cannot attack at least one of them.

> (the worst problem, for your solution, is that I can't imagine how you
> instruct the computer to consider air units differents from sea units
> even if they stay in the same layer, there may be some tricky way to
> overcome this, but I don't consider them viable, do you?)

Exactly how it is done now, by using flags.

> If the layer proposal has the goal of eliminating any kind of special
> flags, than it will fail, at least IMHO. 
> This doesn't mean that layers aren't a good idea, per se, only that
> there are thing that should be generalized and other shouldn't.

Layer proposal is good because it solves problems.  What problems does 
layered attack/defence strength solve?  IMO it only complicates things.


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