This looks to me like A minor clarity isuue. tHE "(LAND)" word suggest, that we should look for fish on land - well, maybe i understood it wrong?
Secondly, there isa fish bonus, but it's already being worked on by another colonist so it's useless to inform me that it gives more fish (Uless I would be putting an Expert Fisherman to work on an inferior spot, while an amateur isworking on bonus, but that's not the case.)
The situation is like this: On the tile I put the colonist , he prosuces two fish, the bonus is already occupied, but there are to more spots which produce 4 fish, so the message is justified by the situation, but the text is inaproprioate. In this situation it should say st like "You could produce more fish on the spot neraby"
(It got complicated. Do You want a save file)
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
To clear up the "fish bonus (land)" part - the fish production on an ocean tile is influenced by the number of neighbouring land tiles. In FreeCol, this is modeled using an "invisible bonus" that is added to these tiles during map generation.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I think "coast" would be an improvement. Furthermore, it is possible that the warning code does not take the presence of workers on other tiles into account. I'll check.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The code uses getVacantColonyTile(), so there should not be a problem there. The main issue might actually be that we call a fish resource a "resource", as opposed to a "bonus", which is not visible on the map. I don't see how this could be fixed, however. Luckily, this problem only affects fish.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was
previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter
did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by
the administrator of this Tracker).
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
What's the bug exactly? Isn't there another tile that would produce more fish, or don't you understand the message?
This looks to me like A minor clarity isuue. tHE "(LAND)" word suggest, that we should look for fish on land - well, maybe i understood it wrong?
Secondly, there isa fish bonus, but it's already being worked on by another colonist so it's useless to inform me that it gives more fish (Uless I would be putting an Expert Fisherman to work on an inferior spot, while an amateur isworking on bonus, but that's not the case.)
The situation is like this: On the tile I put the colonist , he prosuces two fish, the bonus is already occupied, but there are to more spots which produce 4 fish, so the message is justified by the situation, but the text is inaproprioate. In this situation it should say st like "You could produce more fish on the spot neraby"
(It got complicated. Do You want a save file)
To clear up the "fish bonus (land)" part - the fish production on an ocean tile is influenced by the number of neighbouring land tiles. In FreeCol, this is modeled using an "invisible bonus" that is added to these tiles during map generation.
So would changing this to: `Ocean/fish bonus (coast)' be enough of a clarification?
I think "coast" would be an improvement. Furthermore, it is possible that the warning code does not take the presence of workers on other tiles into account. I'll check.
The code uses getVacantColonyTile(), so there should not be a problem there. The main issue might actually be that we call a fish resource a "resource", as opposed to a "bonus", which is not visible on the map. I don't see how this could be fixed, however. Luckily, this problem only affects fish.
Changed the name of the message. Any further suggestions?
This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was
previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter
did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by
the administrator of this Tracker).