[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Project goals

[Per Inge Mathisen <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, saywhat@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > Arbitrarily limiting the number of cities will turn players away from the
> > game in disgust.
>  I disagree; but maybe I'm not understanding you.  Are you
> saying that players who play Freeciv would stop playing it if the
> maximum number of players was lowered to 10 (let alone 5)?
The number of players is a game setup (pregame) limit, not an in-game 
limit. Pregame limitations may be annoying but they do not endanger 
suspension of disbelief in the same way. The fundamental requirement for 
in-game limitations is that they be plausible in some way.
An example of a bad in-game limitation is in the Lord of the Rings RTS 
game, where, because the graphics engine consumes so much CPU, the limit 
on how many units you can produce in multiplayer is so low that you have 
trouble defending and attacking on a large map, no matter how good your 
production. When you reach the limit, the game just says "too many units" 
and prevents you from building more.
> > > - controlled by an option, of course.
> > Then it becomes irrelevant.
>  I don't understand.  It seems like you are saying that
> choosing the maximum number of players is irrelevant.
It seems like I was talking about cities, not players.

> > > 3) Alliances become essential for many players.
> > In multiplayer, alliances are already overpowered.
>  I don't understand.  Do you mean "overpowered" as in
> "alliances are too powerful" or as in "alliances are easily
> defeated"?  (I don't play online; so all that I know about online
> Freeciv games is gleaned from posts on these lists.)
Too powerful.

  - Per