Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: January 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6624) Disband city cleanup
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6624) Disband city cleanup

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: per@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6624) Disband city cleanup
From: "ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 14:28:46 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6624 >

On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 01:59:19PM -0800, Mike Kaufman wrote:
> 
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6624 >
> 
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 01:47:40PM -0800, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> > 
> > <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6624 >
> > 
> > On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, Mike Kaufman wrote:
> > > >- We add a new build item when the city is size 1: Disband City. It costs
> > > > zero and can be built at any time. It removes the city. It cannot be 
> > > > built
> > > > in your capital.
> > >
> > > an interesting effect under a generalized effects regime.
> > 
> > Would it be overly complicated? You'd need a) can be built at any time
> > effect, b) remove city effect, c) only when size 1 condition, and d) not
> > in capital condition...
> 
> yes. it would.
> 
> a) can be accomplished with a 0 gold cost to build. no problem.
> b) easy. also no problem.
> d) messy. We have Capital_City and a cond_eff or Palace and cond_bldg
>    but you want the inverted logic. Bad. That would be a Not_Capital_City
>    effect for all other cities.
> c) the worst. That would mean an additional .cond_size requirement [with
>    multiple modes >,<,=] and that is not going to happen. no way. I was 
>    already thinking about getting rid of cond_eff.

How works the aqueduct and sanitation effect?

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Strub  ***  eMail ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reden ist Silber,
      Schweigen ist Gold!




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