Re: Transports that affect protection?

[Eric McDonald <mcdonald at phy dot cmich dot edu>]

mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Eric McDonald wrote:
>
> > As I recall, there is already a property out there which affects 
> > an occupant's height (for the purpose of vision). Perhaps this 
> > could be commandeered for some sort of attack modification as 
> > well. Just a thought....
>
>
> What if you made the siege tower the attacker, modified by the knights in
> it, instead of the knights the attackers modified by the siege
> tower?  Having the siege tower be the attacker may be less intuitive, but
> it might fit more easily into the existing capabilities of XConq.

If you can tell us which tables could be utilized to do that (with model 
0 combat; it seems to be possible with model 1 combat), I am sure that 
anyone who is interested in item units would be thrilled. From my 
vantage point, I cannot see how it could be done with current tools. 
That is why I proposed the 'occupant-adds-hit-chance', 
'occupant-adds-damage', etc... tables a while back ago when we were on 
the subject of item units. I would love to be proven wrong on this, 
because it means less work further down the road.

The only way that I see to do something like this with existing tables 
would be to make the siege tower ACP-less by default, and then have its 
occupants add ACP to it. Even though I added this feature a while back 
ago, it is not perfect in that, currently, you must wait until the next 
turn for the new ACP value to take effect. More modifications to the 
kernel scheduler and related code are required before the ACP mod will 
be able to take effect in the same turn.

Or, see if the relevant tables work in combat model 1.

Eric