Re: unfair starting positions

[Jim Kingdon <kingdon at panix dot com>]

> The carriers in xconq are too invulnerable. They can sink anything on
> their own, without aircraft. I reakon that the bigger the ship, the more
> vulnerable they should be to subs, forcing the carriers to have
> protection. Capital ships should just annihilate unaccompanied carriers. 

Hmm.  The comment in ww2-div-pac.g says "submarines are deadly to
surface ships" but the actual tables don't seem to bear it out.
In the standard game, submarines seem more deadly to surface ships.

Try something like the following (if you aren't familiar with "diff",
this is just an instruction to add the two lines with "+" at the
location in the file lib/ww2-div-pac.g indicated by the surrounding
lines and the line numbers which are on the lines with "@@").  If it
works well for you, we should presumably check it in.

Index: ww2-div-pac.g
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/xconq/xconq/lib/ww2-div-pac.g,v
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -u -r1.5 ww2-div-pac.g
--- ww2-div-pac.g	11 Aug 2002 21:47:38 -0000	1.5
+++ ww2-div-pac.g	12 Nov 2003 15:19:10 -0000
@@ -301,6 +301,7 @@
   (carrier-types ground-types 50)
   (carrier-types ship-types 50)		;	This is
redundant with ship-types ship-types 50, but
   (carrier-types place-types 50)	 ;	we spell it out for
clarity.
+  (submarine ship-types 70)
   (place-types ground-types 50)
   (place-types ship-types 50)
   (place-types place-types 50)
@@ -316,6 +317,7 @@
   (carrier-types ground-types 1)
   (carrier-types ship-types 1)		;	This is redundant with
ship-types ship-types 1, but
   (carrier-types place-types 1)		;	we spell it
out for clarity.
+  (submarine ship-types 3)
   (place-types ground-types 1)
   (place-types ship-types 1)
   (place-types place-types 1)