Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-ai: January 2003:
[freeciv-ai] Re: (PR#2644) AI needs 5400 years to get Republic

[freeciv-ai] Re: (PR#2644) AI needs 5400 years to get Republic

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: freeciv-ai@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [freeciv-ai] Re: (PR#2644) AI needs 5400 years to get Republic
From: Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 22:16:17 -0800 (PST)

--- "rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx via RT" <rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think Anthony has suggested the right approach to this in his
> summary, though the solution tends to go somewhat against his
> usual views on detailed planning.
> The idea is that production of certain elements like barracks 
> should *not* be a standalone calculation but have a certain
> feedback weight that depends on how many have already been
> built and the current Civ size. There is a flavour of this in
> *minimum* thresholds used in advdomestic.c in the corecleanups
> if you want practical examples.

Devil is in the details Ross. What weights should we go with ?
I do however like your idea.

> The key elements are a (fixed) max/min threshold and a cumulative
> weight that reflects the (civ-wide) level of some component.

When you say fixed max/min threshold, I assume you mean in % terms.
I.E 10% of cities should have barracks/No more than 30%.

I take issue with the fixed max/min threshold. There are certain improvements,
such as aqueducts, marketplaces/libraries whose numbers can be better
every 1-2 turns. 

I.E A 20 city empire. It has no cities larger than size 7. Obviously, rather
than a fixed want of 10% min Aqueducts, it should want 0.

> It should also be the case that individual want calculations take
> into account the strengths of the particular city, and the city
> production be tuned by the wants of a particular personality as 
> well. Thus a food rich city (usually means lots of trade with
> road building) should be tuned for growth, libraries and markets,
> or settler/worker production, i.e. the elements that are most
> population dependent. Shield rich cities should become factories
> for military or non-military units, wonders and defensive strong
> points. And in choosing production and worker tasks, a city should
> have a feedback from the personality desires for vector components.
> A Ghandhi would value population growth (food and social improvements),
> while a Bismark would go for production, science and military
> elements (in that ranking) over growth.

So per city weights as well ? Which one dominates ?

> The combination of the two will insure that cities that are best
> suited for certain production elements, or most in need will be
> the ones to exceed the thresholds, while others will be held back
> in over supply scenarios, and instead turn to some of the other
> opportunities. This will cause a more balanced overall growth, 
> but a much more varied (and hence interesting) mix of individual
> elements.


It is the business of the future to be dangerous; and it is among the merits of
science that it equips the future for its duties. -Alfred North Whitehead

Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]