Update of bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Fixed
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Reply to this item at:
Follow-up Comment #26, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Rebased over r24743 (as patch #3829 landed).
(file #20454)
___
Additional Item Attachment:
File name: enforce-move-nativity+r24743.patch Size:7 KB
Follow-up Comment #25, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
The application of patch #4609 encourages an entirely different approach to
this issue, as reflected in the attached patch (applies over r24741). By
separating the nativity check logic from everything else, it properly handles
cases where
Follow-up Comment #24, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
it may be interesting to consider special handling for the case
where two cardinally adjacent tiles are both native because of
different roads
Also: nativity might be provided by one road (such as alien ruleset Tunnel)
and move bonus by
Update of bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Assigned to: cazfi = None
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16383
___
Message sent
Follow-up Comment #23, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Grr. I need a better way to test pathfinding: things just seeming to work
don't seem to be enough. The attached patch actually clears the roads for the
virtual tile in tile_move_cost_ptrs(), thereby testing the correct condition
to determine
Follow-up Comment #22, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
While working on patch #3886, I realised this also needs adjustments for
pathfinding, so that AI Triremes don't consider the river-path through the
continent the best possible route only to become confused when unable to
actually make a given
Update of bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Status: In Progress = Ready For Test
___
Follow-up Comment #19:
Untested patch
(file #17847)
___
Update of bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Planned Release: 2.5.0 = 2.6.0
___
Follow-up Comment #20:
- Really prevent the move if no suitable road to travel found. It was falling
to default MR_OK
Follow-up Comment #21, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
%s cannot move road diagonally doesn't parse for me (seems to imply the road
is being moved, rather than the unit). How about %s cannot move diagonally
on available roads. It would be nice to know *which* road was cardinal or
Follow-up Comment #17, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
I think this should be determined from recently added move_mode road type
property. This is also linked to bug #20472
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16383
Update of bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Status: Postponed = In Progress
Assigned to: jtn = cazfi
___
Follow-up Comment #18:
This should be
Update of bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Status: In Progress = Postponed
___
Follow-up Comment #15:
In October, I wrote:
I'll post my current patch set here shortly.
Cough!
Attached is my
Follow-up Comment #16, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
About patch # issue: Your comments (comment #7) seem a bit confused. You
mix shore bombardment and can_attack_from_non_native(). Shore bombardment
is about ability to attack *against* non-native tile.
can_attack_from_non_native() is about
Update of bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Planned Release: 2.4.0 = 2.5.0
___
Follow-up Comment #14:
I fear this is unlikely to make 2.4.0 now :(
I've split out the controversial cities change
Follow-up Comment #12, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Pre-existing bugs discovered in comment #9 raised separately as bug #18613
and bug #18675. (The latter was fixed as a side effect of this patch; I've
pulled the relevant bit out.)
___
Follow-up Comment #13, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
An idea: How about creating a new range (for requirements) named
InCity, OnCityTile or something like that for requirements that
are limited to the city tile? Units that only can move on rivers
would have a build requirement like this:
Follow-up Comment #11, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Would you be OK with some way of specifying in the ruleset
whether a given kind of non-native unit requires present or
merely adjacent native terrain to a city? (I haven't even begun
to think about what that might look like, but it should
Follow-up Comment #10, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Made a unit_type that was RiverNative and BuildAnywhere but was not yet
enabled in the terrain ruleset. This resulted that the unit could be in the
city and could move along rivers iff the city was on a river tile. This seems
like an
Follow-up Comment #9, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
I'll look at splitting out the cities bit from the rest -- shouldn't be too
hard, and it'll hopefully allow the (fully working) movement part to be
committed. That is the most important part, which allows RiverNative units to
be trivially
Follow-up Comment #8, bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Cities must be on a river to build and host RiverNative units
This change in philosophy is probably the most far-fetching thing in this
patch. I think we should retain consistency here, so if such a thing is used
for RiverNative units, rules
Update of bug #16383 (project freeciv):
Priority: 1 - Later = 5 - Normal
Status: Need Info = In Progress
Assigned to:None = jtn
Release:
22 matches
Mail list logo
