[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#12837) newbies never know how to declare war

["Andreas Røsdal" <andrearo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=12837 >

Alternatively, if you attack another unit while at peace, then this is 
most likely a concious decision where you really want to attack that 
player. So then you should get a query-dialog asking you to confirm that 
you want to declare war with that player, and act accordingly.

At least this happens to me often; I'm going to attack a player, and 
move an attacking unit towards the enemy. When the time is ready for an 
attack, I issue a goto-order which would result in attack, and then I'm 
told that I'm not at war with that player, and have to declare war 
first. Then I'm forced to open the players dialog, and locate that 
player (which can take some time with many players), and cancel the 
treaty. What I would prefer is a way to quickly declare war without the 
players-dialog, instead some quick operation (such as confirming that I 
really want to declare war) in connection with the attack of the unit.

Andreas R.

Thomas Müller wrote:

><URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=12837 >
>
>I think, if attack another unit while at peace, there should be a counter. If 
>you try it three times, you get a popup that explains how to declare war.
>
>Thomas
>
>Am Mittwoch, 19. Oktober 2005 22:50 schrieb Peter Schaefer:
>  
>
>><URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=12837 >
>>
>>Maybe when you are at peace or neutral respectively, doing an attack
>>move three times should cancel peace treaty or declare war
>>respectively. One problem with this idea is that it is still possible
>>to accidently declare war, maybe even by a goto.
>>
>>On 10/17/05, Vasco Alexandre da Silva Costa <vasc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>><URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=12837 >
>>>
>>>Maybe the menu item name should be dynamic instead of just being named
>>>"cancel treaty". It could be named "cancel peace treaty" or "cancel
>>>alliance" depending on the treaty.
>>>
>>>The problem with the current item name is the result of the action it
>>>does is not comprehensible from that item name.
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>