Re: [Freecol-developers] FreeCol 0.11.5
Looks like the website is still out of date. Thanks, Caleb -- ___ Freecol-developers mailing list Freecol-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freecol-developers
Re: [Freecol-developers] 0.11.5
On Sun, 2 Aug 2015 12:32:28 +0200 win...@genial.ms wrote: I did cherry-pick the relevant commits for 0.11.5 and pushed a stable and a tentative branch. Please, help testing these to ensure we don't have another lurking bug! The stable branch survives several moves and load/save. But then so did 0.11.4 with the way I play. The upload is proceeding. I also updated the wiki, copied the empty template for later and added text to the 0.11.5 page. Please, do proofreading! I'm not sure if a mention of the Windows problems BR#793 and/or BR#2328/BR#2729 in the common problems section is necessary, but there had been none in 0.11.4 page, too. Having them on the bug report page is adequate. I have proofread and just explained the region bug a little more. Cheers, Mike Pope pgphjDRr993yw.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- ___ Freecol-developers mailing list Freecol-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freecol-developers
Re: [Freecol-developers] New-colonists and Breeding-control options
On Thu, 28 May 2015 23:53:54 +0200 Fenyo feny...@gmail.com wrote: I have several objections to this patch as it stands. First, I would like to see some reasoning for why you would want to suppress colonist production at all. Very odd idea IMHO. I think it would have been better to discuss this on the developer list. Ok, background: There is a colony, where i do not want to make new colonists, because i need the food it produces. (And i have a lot of colonies where i do not want the new colonists, i want them to appear somewhere else, not in that colony) You can say for this that i should collect the food from such colonies with a wagon train or a ship, before the food reaches 200. But - unfortunatelly - i can not guarantee everytime that my wagon train or ship will arrive before the food hits 200. And when it does, it will convert the food to a new colonist. :( I have experienced this a lot in my games. And this population control is the solution for such problems. OK... that sort of makes sense. I am quietly mumbling just build more wagons, but I that is close enough to reasonable to not immediately dismiss. I am aware of the problem of food accumulating in the wrong places, but usually that is late in the game when the colony in question can reasonably just give the new colonist some horses and have it head off to a better place promptly. So what then is your use-case for controlling the breedable goods production? I am guessing you want to not give the horses any food? Does it have to be a ratio, or is a boolean sufficient? And if you really want a ratio, is this worth doing for other goods types? The game option for the breeding functionality makes more sense, and I think it is a good idea. However this whole area is very sensitive. Changing the code here needs to be done with caution, so I think you have no reason to fear. I have already tested it very thoroughly. And it works perfect. That is so easy to say. I am not immediately going to go all the way to allowing individual colony settings, but am willing to allow a global breeding control so we can check if this breaks anything. Once we are more confident it is working, I will be happy to consider the individual colony settings. It won't break anything. And i promise you that if we still find out it does, i will fix that very soon! But if you insist for a global value only at first, OK, now I understand *why* you want to do this, I can see that asking to go first to a global setting is not a good way to test it properly. Scratch that idea. Finally, the patch is way too complex, as it bundles several separable pieces of functionality. Yeah, i thought that myself too. But since the new colonist suppression is reproduction related just like the breeding, they have to be on the same panel: Reproduction. OK, this is where I am still not convinced. There is a high level similarity perhaps, but the internal mechanism is very different. I would much prefer the breeding part to be attached to the colony building for the goods type, and the population part to trigger a panel very similar to the current Build Queue --- to stop colonist production you would just clear the Population Queue. That would enable other interesting enhancements such as colonies that can produce particular colonist types. Not to mention separating the functionality as I would still strongly prefer. Cheers, Mike Pope pgpxrxEelnZjI.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- ___ Freecol-developers mailing list Freecol-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freecol-developers
Re: [Freecol-developers] Skipping the turn should mean skipping the turn...
On 2015-08-03 03:41, Michael T. Pope wrote: On Fri, 31 Jul 2015 14:24:25 -0600 The REF has a lot more patience than humans. Keep hoping we implement unit grouping one day. I just went through the IR list and closed two duplicate requests for it, and another one on the FC2 list IIRC. Indeed, and the fact that it's a patience issue is a good reason to hold trying to implement that until FC2. Individual unit moves are tedious but functional. Also, my mega stacks of doom are usually smaller than the REF's. When I press space for a unit to skip the turn, I expect that to mean that it will not pop up and ask me for orders again during that turn. That's what skip means. If I wanted it to ask me again, I'd use the wait command. [lots more] Thanks for the detailed description. In short, you are quite right, this is broken and annoying, probably is a bug, and its worse that you mention in that everything can get woken up again after the trade route and/or goto orders are executed. Clearly the semantics of Skip have drifted with time. It may take a bit of trial and error, but we should be able to bring it back to skip really means skip. There is some internal weirdness with units that are given a move that can not be completed immediately, units with long distance goto orders, and units that have had their moves removed for special reasons (e.g. trade haggle fail), hence my caution. Which if any of these (including explicitly skipped units) should appear in the End Turn panel is another question. I am assuming that if you skip a unit, you would *not* want its potential for movement zeroed out, so that it would still be able to be activated by hand and moved. Yes, that assumption is correct. That makes it work the same as Fortify which can be undone by reselecting the unit on the same turn, which makes it possible to correct an accidental fortify order. However, if wait worked correctly (see below), that would be an option if the movement was zeroed out for skip. (Fortify might have some oddness, too. It seems that when you fortify, you cannot reactivate the unit on the next turn. You have to wait for the next turn after. That may be intentional and might even be what Col1 does. It just seemed surprising. I haven't specifically tested for that behaviour, though, so I might be misremembering what it was doing. It's usually not a problem since I usually fortify units for a long term.) Since sending my original description, I observed some weirdness with the wait order, too, which might be related. I had a dragoon and a couple of artillery in a tile. I wanted to give the artillery orders so I pressed w. The dragon remained active. I had to actually select the artillery to give it orders first. -- ___ Freecol-developers mailing list Freecol-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freecol-developers
