Follow-up Comment #1, patch #4671 (project freeciv): I'm uncomfortable with the philosophy behind this patch, because it encodes what actions can be done by action+terrain, rather than basing it on unit nativity, which either forces all action-enabled units to have similar nativity or requires the ruleset author to spend all sorts of time duplicating actionenabler enties to support the alternatives. This represents a regression from current behaviour (where one can reuse the same actionenabler clauses for both land-based and sea-based spies, for example).
So, if we consider these actions to be attacks, could we not reuse unit nativity, UCF_ATT_NON_NATIVE, and UTYF_ONLY_NATIVE_ATTACK as a means to limit the actions that a unit may take against a given tile? Alternately, if actions are not to be considered attacks, I'd much prefer to see the nativity constructions be about unit definitions than about hardcoded terrains (this may require adding the ability to determine if a unit is native to a tile as a requirement). _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <http://gna.org/patch/?4671> _______________________________________________ Message sent via/by Gna! http://gna.org/ _______________________________________________ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freecivfirstname.lastname@example.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev