The client code seems to use UMT_*, TC_OCEAN, is_foo_unit(), and is_ocean() in several places for which I don't really understand the correct behaviour to support complex unit nativity. Suggestions, opinions, and pointers to open bugs or patches welcome.
climisc.c:unit_color_type() This function uses UMT_* as a guide to set the correct background color for a unit, which seems only to be used in the Xaw client. I would think that with complex nativity, it makes sense to assign the background color for tiles based on terrain, player knowledge, etc. I don't have much familiarity with Xaw, so I don't understand if we can use logic like that used for the gtk2/3 clients' create_overlay_unit() (or some analog thereto) to initialise to black and then modify based on terrain/tileset definitions. unitselect_common.c:usdlg_check_unit_location() This function has support for selecting units based on move_type explicitly. I've never used this feature, so don't know common use cases. For complex nativity, I suspect that these become less useful: various amphibious units are inherently excluded, which may be unfortunate for rulesets with many ocean depths that allow most land units on the shallowest of oceans (which might not be particularly deep, and may not permit access by most seaworthy units). Units with restrictions within classic nativity (only some land, only some oceanic, only roads, etc.) may be selected inappropriately, as they might be unsuitable for use for the intended purpose (e.g. cannot move to some target). control.c:quickselect() This function has different heuristics for different environments. In rulesets that might have land transporters that carry land units, or sea transports that only carry sea units, or land units that can't move because they require roads, or similar complexities, I'm not sure that these heuristics are sufficient, nor that there aren't assumptions about available terrains and unit classes built into the heuristics. That said, I don't use this, so hesitate to apply a patch that might break someone's gameplay. Naively, I would think the following might work sensibly for arbitrary terrains and units: 1) Native military attack units 2) Native transports 3) Other native units 4) Non-native units On the other hand, ordered like that, for the classic ruleset (as an example), Air, Helicopter, and Missile units might be selected much more often than was intended. Perhaps reachability ought be added to the criteria checked, to decrease the chance of selection. Given that this feature is most useful when the player has no time to think, it is somewhat important not to be surprising, either by selecting the wrong unit or by failing to select the expected unit because of the current nativity restrictions. editor.c:editor_grab_tool() This just chooses ground units before sea units: I presume the intent is to deprioritise sea units in port (given the score reduction for transported units which adjusts this). My thought here is to prioritise native units over non-native units (so that the order depends on terrain), but I don't remember using this tool either (unless it is responsible for unit ordering in the unit pane in the editor), so don't know if this would break someone's workflow. Separately, this function seems to use UCF_UNREACHABLE as a proxy for aerial units, and selects them first. If the sorting is somewhat intended to describe altitude, this wouldn't work for Burrowing units from the alien ruleset, for example. If the intent is to prioritise "important" units somehow, where aerial==important, there's no need to adjust it, as most unreachable units are likely to be of particular interest in most rulesets. If I'm incorrect about the proxy use here, then nothing needs be done for UCF_UNREACHABLE. Those client uses of is_ocean() and TC_OCEAN not mentioned above seemed sane to me (and safe for complex nativity), although I wonder if the code ought standardise on one or the other representation of this idea (changelogs suggest general migration to is_ocean(), but some of the calls that use TC_OCEAN might need refactoring for this). The idea of selecting coastal cities may also be slightly less useful for rulesets with particularly complex nativity, as some "coastal" cities might not support many "sea" units, etc. Similarly, the current "coastal" check happens to also select all Oceanic cities that aren't built on a lake. -- Emmet HIKORY _______________________________________________ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freecivfirstname.lastname@example.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev