Re: RFE: terrain improvement: canal

> * Peter Schaefer <crgre.fpunrsre-Er5WDRrDdr8NikgvhZjk3j-Sn5dYDs+udD6nGSXaiLjeg@public.gmane.org> [2006-01-18 22:38:25 +0100]:
>
> On 1/17/06, Sam Steingold <sds-mXXj517/[email protected]> wrote:
>> > * Michael Kaufman
>
>> > 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)
>
> Yea ok, but what would be the rule where to start a river?

a _canal_ can be started from any point that has access to water:
next to ocean or a river (at least one the the 4 tiles).

> For realism, all decent squares for a river would already have one,
> and usually engineers need to move a lot of land to make it flow
> elsewhere.

I don't understand.  Sorry.

> Now if freeciv maps always had a height map, this would be
> interesting, but this way it will just end up with complete continents
> being converted to rivers, which begs the question "Where does all the
> water come from"?

you can end up with all mountains converted to plains too -
so where does all the ground go?
canal digging should not be too cheap - it should be more expensive than
mining but cheaper than terraforming.

> Now for ships navigating rivers, this is not possible unless someone
> creates a system, including graphics, for having big, small and maybe
> even medium rivers.

and engineers should be able to expand rivers.

> Example, AFAIK, the Missisippi was navigated by ironclads in the US
> Civil War, so for a map with lots of land between the navigable
> rivers(think scale map=3DUSA), it would be interesting to have this
> feature.

if a city can be attacked by a sea vessel, such a city should be able to
build a harbor.

finally, as I mentioned in
<http://article.gmane.org/gmane.games.freeciv.general:4035>,
a naval attack against an undefended city should work like this:

1. <virtually> create a settler out of the city; population is reduced by 1

2. the virtual settler fights the ship
   - if the ship wins, the virtual settler disappears (together with the
     buildings lost in the attack &c), population remains reduced
   - if the ship loses to the virtual settler, the virtual settler also
     disappears but the city population is restored to its original
     value (i.e., increased by 1); optionally: reduce food reserves
     (granary) in proportion to the damage sustained by the virtual settler

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k
http://www.dhimmi.com http://www.savegushkatif.org
http://truepeace.org http://www.iris.org.il http://www.mideasttruth.com
Even Windows doesn't suck, when you use Common Lisp