Replace the fixed $1 per ETU maintenance for capital/city sectors that
are at least 60% efficient by a configurable maintenance cost, payable
regardless of efficiency. The only change in the default
configuration is that inefficient capitals now pay maintenance.
Charging sector maintenance regardless of efficiency is consistent
with unit maintenance.
New struct dchrstr member d_maint and sector-chr selector maint. Make
show_sect_build() show it. Change produce_sect() to record
maintenance in new slot p_sect[SCT_MAINT] instead of abusing
p_sect[SCT_CAPIT]. Replace the "Capital maintenance" line in budget
by "Sector maintenance".
Print sector type mnemonic and name, like show sect s and c. Print
"can't" instead of negative number for sectors players can't designate
(this was not an issue before the previous commit). Show build cost
per 100%, like show ship, land, plane and nuke. Size the columns more
sensibly.
This is for consistency with aerial mining. Seamines don't work under
bridges anyway (they did a long time ago, until Empire 2).
Making seamines work under bridges again wouldn't be hard, but it
would make the 'X' in bmaps ambiguous.
Its implementation in s_commod() increases lnd_seqno even when
!actually_doit, which can cause spurious seqno oopses in callers of
lnd_could_be_supplied(). I can't be bothered to clean up this mess
right now, because recursive resupply is too dumb to be really useful
anyway: each step uses the first source it finds, without
consideration of mobility cost.
It claimed ships and land units don't need shells if they can draw
them from a supply source. That was never true for ships, I believe,
and became wrong for land units in commit f6c87d21.
Food supply during update adds complexity to the update. How much
good it does to players is highly doubtful; certainly nobody can rely
on it. It isn't covered by the starvation command. Starving ships or
land units can steal enough food from their sector to make it starve,
too. Finally, the supply code is notoriously hard to use correctly.
We don't know of issues with the update's use, but we haven't
convinced ourselves that there aren't any either.
4.0.9 changed flak not to use up shells, but they still had to be
present. Drop that, because it doesn't really provide any value.
Moreover, this gets rid of the buggy flak shell supply code (seqno
mismatch oopses, lost supplies).
The ancients designed interception dead simple: when you overfly a
sector, you get intercepted by the sector owner. Fine print
interception rules govern which planes intercept.
Then complexity got piled on top of it.
Chainsaw 2 added an extra interception by surface ship owners, in the
target sector only.
Chainsaw 3 added an extra interception by land unit owners, in the
target sector only (Empire 4 later merged this extra land unit
interception with the extra surface ship interception).
Chainsaw 3 added an entirely separate kind of interception: air
defense missions. When you enter a sector in some air defense op
area, you get intercepted. Fine print air defense rules govern which
planes intercept. These rules differ significantly from the
interception fine print.
Additional complexity comes from these facts:
* Air defense mission interception happens in addition to non-mission
interception. You can boost your total interception by setting up
air defense. Which means you must set it up, or forgo an advantage.
* Air defense planes are not available for non-mission interception
duty. You need to decide on a split.
* In contrast to non-mission interception, interceptors flying air
defense get intercepted.
Moreover, the air defense code breaks one of the plane code's design
assumptions, namely that just one plane sortie is active at a time.
The air defense sortie runs while the sortie it intercepts is in
progress. This leads to two interceptions being active at the same
time: the one intercepting the original sortie, and the one
intercepting the air defense sortie. The same plane can fly in both
interceptions, and damage received in the interception of the air
defense sortie is wiped out, triggering a seqno mismatch oops.
The previous commit already simplified non-mission interception: you
get intercepted by anyone who owns the sector, or a surface ship or a
land unit there, whether it's the target sector or not.
Now simplify mission interception, by merging air defense back into
ordinary interception: when you overfly a sector, you get intercepted
by anyone who owns the sector, or a surface ship or land unit there,
or has an air defense mission covering the sector. That's all. No
multiple interceptions, no separate air defense rules.
Remove air_defense(). Simplify ac_encounter() and sam_intercept()
accordingly; both lose their last parameter.
Change sam_intercept() and ac_intercept() to intercept in mission op
areas. New parameter only_mission to suppress non-mission
interception. Pass zero when the intercepting country owns the sector
or a surface ship or land unit in the sector.
ac_encounter() can't efficiently predict whether a country intercepts,
so it needs to call ac_intercept() unconditionally. This kills the
optimization to collect interceptors only when needed; simplify
accordingly, replacing getilist() by getilists().
In each sector, any country owning the sector, a surface ship or a
land unit gets to intercept.
Before, only the sector owner got to intercept, except for the target
sector. There, any country owning surface ships or land units got to
intercept in addition to the sector owner. Thus, a sector owner with
surface ships or land units there got to intercept twice.
Info Intercept claimed you get to intercept once for ships and once
again for land units, which was wrong since 4.0.9.
Info bomb suggested that flak fires only in the target sector, which
was wrong since 4.2.8. Drop that.
Before, the escort mission didn't support an op-area, and planes on
escort mission escorted anywhere. Change mission() to define the
op-area for escort missions as well. Show it in mission() and
show_mission(). Check it in find_escorts().
Land unit reactions are overly complex because we have two different
concepts controlling them: reaction radius (set with lrange) and
reserve mission (set with mission). You need to deal with both to set
up or query reactions.
Commit 8d0e1af5 "fixed" this by making reserve missions meaningless.
The previous commit made reserve missions meaningful again: they
support an op-area now. This brought back the problem of having to
deal with two separate commands to accomplish one thing.
Fix this for good by removing non-mission land unit reaction
alltogether. The only feature we lose by that is the ability to order
land units to react until the order is explicitely cancelled. That's
because missions are implicitely cleared by many commands and events,
while non-mission reaction wasn't. Closes#858121 and #858122.
Remove the non-mission reaction case from att_reacting_units().
Don't limit reserve missions to the land unit's reaction radius: make
lnd_reaction_range() return the type's maximum radius instead of
lnd_rad_max.
The reaction radius is now useless. Remove the lrange command, and
struct lndstr member lnd_rad_max along with its selector react.
Remove land command's column rd. Make ldump show column react as
zero. Deprecate edit key 'P' in dounit(), and don't show it in
pr_land().
Before, they always reacted to their maximum range, and the op-area
was unused. Change mission() to define the op-area for reserve
missions as well. Remove the special-case for showing reserve
missions from mission() and show_mission(). New lnd_reaction_range()
factored out of att_reacting_units(). Use it in oprange() to cover
reserve missions. Pass the mission as separate parameter to oprange()
for now, because miss() doesn't set it in the object until later.
Land units on reserve missions used to pay only half the usual
mobility for combat. This bonus was commented out in the code in
4.0.0, but not in info. Remove it from both.
With RAILWAYS, highway-like sectors double as rail. They need to be
at least 5% efficient to be operational, and then they additionally
extend rail into adjacent sectors that are at least 60% efficient.
New opt_RAILWAYS, SCT_HAS_RAIL(), sct_rail_track(). Update
sector_mcost(), bp_neighbors(), lnd_mar_one_sector() for RAILWAYS
mobility rules. Update sinfra(), spyline(), satdisp_sect() to show
rail track instead of rail infrastructure for RAILWAYS.
New virtual sector selector track, implemented by nsc_sct_track().
Planes and land units on ships are sold along with the ship, but trade
showed them only when SHOWPLANE was enabled. Show them always.
Planes on land units are not sold along with the land unit, but trade
showed them when SHOWPLANE was enabled. Don't.
You can now scrap ships in own or friendly, efficient harbors, planes
in own or allied, efficient airfields, and land units in any own or
allied sector.
When something can't be scrapped because of these rules, print a
suitable message.
Before, you could scrap ships regardless of relations to sector owner
(info claimed friendly was required), land units regardless of
relations, but not while on ships, and planes even in friendly
airfields (info claimed allied was required).
When scrapping in a deity sector, scrap claimed it gave the cargo to
POGO, which is somewhat bogus, as POGO can't own such stuff.
