Re: naval attacks on undefended cities

Or both reduce the chance that damage happens to the city and make it
possible to bombard empty cities.

On 11/8/05, Christian Knoke <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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 wer=
e
> > 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 atta=
ck.
> Or reduce the chance that this will happen.
>
> Christian
>
> --
> Christian Knoke            * * *            http://cknoke.de
> * * * * * * * * *  Ceterum censeo Microsoft esse dividendum.
>
>
>