Re: naval attacks on undefended cities

On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 11:17:02AM -0500, Sam Steingold wrote:
> 
> this is all totally beyond the point, which is -- a ship should be able
> to shell an undefended city, reducing its population and/or destroying
> buildings.
> I fail to see why a city with no units should be at an advantage
> compared with a city with units.
> 
> Algorithmically, we can treat an undefended city of size N as if it were
> a city of size N-1 defended by a single settler unit. I think this is a
> reasonable approach.

This will make it far too easy to conquer a weaker nation.

Rather we can remove the population decrease in case of a successful attack.
Or reduce the chance that this will happen.

Christian

-- 
Christian Knoke            * * *            http://cknoke.de
* * * * * * * * *  Ceterum censeo Microsoft esse dividendum.