[Freeciv] Re: siege

[Christian Knoke <chrisk@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Aug 27, 2005 at 11:59:12AM +0000, Per Inge Mathisen wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Aug 2005, Sam Steingold wrote:
> > Placing an enemy city under siege should be easier
> 
> An idea:
> 
> Taking a page from Moo2, there could be a rule that if an enemy military
> unit is is seen and in the citymap of a city, then productions are halved
> and you cannot buy production.  Usually that will mean rapid starvation.

During a game, the means a nation has to keep enemies away from its skin,
evolve. A well equipped civ may be easily able to remove an enemy unit
vagabonding through its teritory. During the first half, it is probably not.

A simple phalanx installed on a mountain top can be a pain, it is expensive
to destroy.

So at least this rule has to scale for city size.

Second, if you build (as most people do) your cities nearer then 5 or 6
tiles apart, that unit can block 2, 3 or even 4 cities. If you restrict this
to 1 city, you are again back to the worker model.

This rule overweights siege largely to attack.

If borders, even in war, would block entering enemies teritorry without
conquering the nearest city, this might be a way, not so.

> However, then we should remove the rule that says enemy units displace
> city workers on a tile.

Yes.

> This would simply the rules quite a bit, and speed up the server, since
> reorganizing a city every tile an enemy unit moves while in city range (as
> is done now) takes a lot of CPU time currently.

I agree that the worker has some disadvantages.

Christian

-- 
Christian Knoke            * * *            http://cknoke.de
* * * * * * * * *  Ceterum censeo Microsoft esse dividendum.