More unit view stuff

[Hans Ronne <hronne at telia dot com>]

I am considering some other changes to the view code, too. One involves the
handling of see-always units (usually cities). As it now works, they remain
hidden until revealed either by expanding your coverage or by "Enemy
information fell into your hands!" during unit capture. Once reveled, they
are not only visible, but also made part of the permanently covered area.
This means that you can now see what happens in the same cell for the rest
of the game. However, these see-always units still differ from your own
units in that adjacent cells are not included in the permanently covered
area.

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? Even if it is captured by a third side? The fact that
you see only the unit's own cell adds some further weirdness. For example,
you will then also see splash images from unseen enemy units being hit in
adjacent unseen cells. Strange.

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, but not know what happens to it or to adjacent units
afterwards.

Another question is how to handle "Enemy information fell into your hands!"
for non-see-always (usually mobile) units. 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'm not sure what to do about
it, though. Perhaps more of the terrain should be revealed instead, at
least adjacent cells? This could also apply to cities, BTW. 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.

Hans