Update of patch #3826 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Reply to this item at:
Update of patch #3826 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Planned Release: = 2.5.0, 2.6.0
Follow-up Comment #14, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
Shipping rulesets have no bases surviving in the cities, but if we are adding
it as a feature for ruleset, it should work. Note that almost any ruleset
where some base can exist in city is subject to superior nation conquered
city from weaker
Follow-up Comment #15, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
My apologies. I suppose I'm used to significantly less mature projects, where
a feature freeze tends to happen only immediately prior to release (but
releases correspondingly tend to be buggier without the overlap).
Attached is a patch with
Follow-up Comment #9, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
There's no other callers via fc_funcs-destroy_base(), but there's direct
callers in server
grep -r destroy_base server/
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/patch/?3826
Follow-up Comment #10, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
Oh, sure. These all assume that destroy_base() will call tile_remove_base().
I was mostly concerned about callbacks, because they could potentially *not*
call tile_remove_base(), which would require the extra call in
tile_change_terrain().
Follow-up Comment #11, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
Redundant call of tile_remove_base() now patch #3876
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/patch/?3826
___
Message sent via/by Gna!
Follow-up Comment #12, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
As you are handling road and base upgrades separately, I assume some messages
to player be suboptimal if there's both road and base upgradet at the same
time. Namely: Will it say The people ... stunned by your technological
insight! twice when
Follow-up Comment #13, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
Do you think it's worth adding trivalue logic for 2.5, when it will all be
swept away for 2.6 with extras? At least for the shipping rulesets, there are
no cases of this.
___
Reply to
Follow-up Comment #5, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
Then I noticed how roads and bases are handled differently when new city is
founded. Existing roads remain, but bases are removed unless city owner would
be able to build new such base.
I think you should be removing only those bases (and
Follow-up Comment #6, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
Updated patch adjusts base destruction to not be player-specific (so that
players may build cities on city-compatible bases they could not build
themselves, and keep the base), as well as removing any city-incompatible
roads when founding a
Follow-up Comment #7, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
I don't think there's any actual need for double removal, but otherwise
destroy_base() would need to either be passed boolean parameter telling if
caller is removing base itself, or it would need to be able to deduct the need
itself. Some
Follow-up Comment #4, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
The attached patch should address all comments, and applies against trunk.
Thanks for pointing out how roads/bases are removed when terrain is changed.
For some reason, in the initial testing, I wasn't successful in restricting
bases in
Follow-up Comment #3, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
- git commit message claims that pcity is needed for requirements preventing
building base/road in cities, but CityTile, Center, Local requirement is
used for that.
It's probably a good idea to pass that city information to requirement
parsing,
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?3826
Summary: Allow bases on city tiles
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: persia
Submitted on: Tue 02 Apr 2013 04:29:57 PM GMT
Category: general
Priority: 5 - Normal
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
whether to set AlwaysOnCityCenter or AutoOnCityCenter flag
for road_type road in civ1, civ2, and civ2civ3
civ1/civ2 always had the road on city center. As up to freeciv-2.4, freeciv
always gave, and expected, road to all city center tiles,
Follow-up Comment #2, patch #3826 (project freeciv):
Aha! revision 21864. Sorry about that.
allow-bases-in-cities+fixed-rulesets.patch should restore the prior behaviour
properly, unless I missed something between 21864 and 22649 that further
adjusted the values.
(file #17658)
17 matches
Mail list logo
