Re: RFE: terrain improvement: canal

> * Michael Kaufman <xnhszna-FSKeTS+cJD0OLKKHP76PeANQWPTQNkuV-Sn5dYDs+udD6nGSXaiLjeg@public.gmane.org> [2006-01-17 08:59:16 -0600]:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 09:32:15AM -0500, Sam Steingold wrote:
>> > * Per Inge Mathisen <cre-0/[email protected]> [2006-01-17 11:46:49 +0000]:
>> >
>> > We want a _gameplay_ reason for adding something like this. As in "what
>> > does this add to the game" in terms of plausibility, fun or game balance.
>> 
>> the "ultimate state" of an ocean square is 2/1/3 (democracy+platform).
>> the "ultimate state" of a forest with a river is 1/3/2 (w/ RR) - same
>> total of 6.
>> without a river it is 1/3/0 which is significantly weaker.
>> I want to be able to make my forest a good as an ocean.
>
> I think the answer is: too bad. If you really want this, change the
> ruleset. In terms of plausibility, a forest w/o a river _is_ weaker
> than ocean w/ platform. You can't just make a river flow where you
> want it. Ask the Army Corps of Engineers.

you cannot irrigate an arbitrary square either.
(I enumerated limitations in the original message)

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k
http://www.dhimmi.com http://www.palestinefacts.org http://www.jihadwatch.org
http://ffii.org http://www.iris.org.il http://www.openvotingconsortium.org
Beliefs divide, doubts unite.