<URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39852 >
Daniel Markstedt wrote: > Yes, this is dangerous. But it's also up to the player to decide if > it's worth sacrificing the air unit or not. > yes. > This is indeed a problem. It seems the code always assumes an air unit > starts its turn on a safe tile, .... No, to reiterate my previous message: * For AI, the code checks the tile, and only allows moves to safe tiles. AFAICT, AI only does "final" moves. * For users, the code only checks the tile after 1/2 the remaining moves are used. This allows the user to set waypoints. Thus, for users, trying to move more than 1/2 the remaining moves will be prevented to dangerous positions. The user can, by setting waypoints, or moving less than 1/2 the remaining moves (in short segments), put the aircraft into a position that can never land safely. Test it yourself. Send a bomber out to the ocean, and then the next turn watch the cursor change as you slowly move it back toward its origin. At 1/2 the distance, it will change to forbidden (until it reaches safety). Instead, move less than 1/2 your moves out farther into the ocean. Now, you cannot ever get back. That's allowable, a deliberate choice. > Actually, the only time a goto to an unsafe tile should be allowed for > a non-attack move on the last turn of a mission is when the air unit > sits on a safe tile. > And that is exactly how the code works -- for only the last move. This is as flexible as I can make it -- 1/2 seems to be a good compromise. Without this compromise, waypoints would *not* work on the final turn, they could only be used the first turn. Yes, the user can do stupid things. But this is not (should not) be a nanny program. Most of the time, I hate the paths the code picks. I want to use waypoints. They are a feature of 2.1! _______________________________________________ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
