[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6669) Poles on a N-S wrapping topology

["Gregory Berkolaiko" <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6669 >

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Jason Short wrote:

> 
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6669 >
> 
> Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> > <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6669 >
> > 
> > After some thinking I now fully agree with Ross' position.  The option 
> > "haspoles" is completely unnecessary.
> > 
> > The behaviour should be:
> > 
> > * separatepoles = 1, N-S wrap off: two separate arctic continents
> > 
> > * separatepoles = 1, N-S wrap on : one separate arctic continent
> > 
> > * separatepoles = 0, any wrap: no specially crafted separate arctic
> > continents, but the normal continents will have colder terrain in extreme
> > north and south coordinates (as in the other cases).
> 
> But I say again that's not what the separatepoles option does.  All it 
> does now is control whether the arctic continents (which exist in any 
> case) are separated from the rest of the terrain (via make_passable or 
> directly in initworld).

Yes, the above scheme means that it's impossible to get a polar strip 
connected to some of the continents.  What do you think, Ross?

> I think what you're saying is that the separatepoles option is unnecessary.
> 
> Also, I'm opposed to manditory polar terrain.  The torus world without 
> any poles can lead to a fairer competitive game, which will be desirable 
> for a lot of people.

Then you have to switch off tundra as well.  I would rather have an option 
controlling the temprature gradient as we are moving from the equator to 
the extremes.

G.