Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: April 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#8455) Bombardment (aka ranged attack)
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#8455) Bombardment (aka ranged attack)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: undisclosed-recipients: ;
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#8455) Bombardment (aka ranged attack)
From: "James Canete" <use_less@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 17:58:55 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=8455 >

bombard-norange, version 2

Changes:
-removed functions from combat.[ch].  Bombardment now uses unit's attack
strength.
-most(all?) of the changes Per requested.

Issues:
-There should be a a division of the slow, strong attack unit types into
bombardment units and slow attack units, like Civ 3's catapult and
swordsman.
-bombard_rate is used, in unit_bombard() in server/unithand.c.  But it
could easily be set to a unit-wide default value, like say, 6.

Thoughts:
I'd still like ranged combat to get in, simply because SMAC has ranged
combat. :) Also I think it adds a touch of tactical flavour to the game,
increasing the importance of placement over stacking.

I mostly put in bombardment to fight the anticipated occurrence of
superstacks, which are an often-requested feature (from the people I
play with, anyway :).  What I mean when I say superstack is a stack that
doesn't die when one unit in it is attacked and defeated.  It is then
used as a sledgehammer against an enemy.  A bombarding unit is then
effective against it since it hurts everything on the stack. 
Bombardment without range still works, but it's harder since the
bombarding unit has to basically park and wait for the superstack to
pass by. :)

So, yeah, bombardment is basically a solution looking for a problem. :)

-James Canete

Attachment: bombard-norange2.diff
Description: Binary data


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