Re: More unit view stuff

[Jim Kingdon <kingdon at panix dot com>]

> This does not make sense. It is easy to understand how the location of
> an enemy city could fall into your hands through capture of an enemy
> unit. But why should you also be able to see what happens in that
> distant city for the rest of the game?

Well, the comment says:

    ;; Towns and cities always have foreign correspondents, telephones,
    ;; private citizens coming and going, so their state is always
    ;; going to be available to any side that knows they exist.

    (add cities see-always true)

> The obvious fix is to make see-always units visible, but not part of the
> permanently covered area. You would get to know the unit's location and see
> its obsolete view

What does that have to do with see-always?

I think you are proposing to get rid of see-always.  Which might make
sense.

> As it now works, the terrain in the same cell as the unit is drawn,
> together with a unit view that quickly becomes obsolete. This makes
> little sense.

I guess I don't see any obvious problem with it.  The balancing act
here is to not reveal too much.  Right now, the standard game reveals
too much.  Capture a few towns and you know where the enemy's home
base is.

> Alternatively, one could restrict capture-related information to the
> location of see-always enemy units, i.e. cities, for which this
> concept makes more sense.

Might work.  Or just non-mobile units (e.g. cities and bases).