Re: adding races later on (was: Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Cheap aifill bug)

[John Goerzen <jgoerzen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> > This has some disadvantages.  The chief one is placement.  How is a
> > good spot determined?  What if one particular player has already
> > explored the map where the new one is added?  This existing player
> > then has a distinct advantage not only over the new player but over
> > other players as well.  There are other potential problems as well.
> 
> But Civ I already does it!  I think the algorithm is to

I may be the only person here that has never played Civ I or Civ II
(Yes, FreeCiv was my first civ-type game), so forgive me if I don't
realize these things please :-)

> replace every deceased civilization with a new one until 1AD.
> (I don't now about Civ II.)

That, I suppose, could make sense -- but what if the civilization is
deceased because somebody else took over all of it?  In this case,
there may not be any good place for a new civ.

> It's easy to keep record of all explored terrain and use it in the
> placement algorithm.

True, but what happens if there's no suitable unexplored location?

> Also, when it is possible to create new races while the game is running,
> it will be easy to add barbarians.

I'm not trying to say "don't do it", since it would certainly be a
server option.  I'm just trying to point out some flaws with the
idea.  Even so, I might want to use it on occasion myself.

John

-- 
John Goerzen   Linux, Unix consulting & programming   jgoerzen@xxxxxxxxxxxx |
Developer, Debian GNU/Linux (Free powerful OS upgrade)       www.debian.org |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Visit the Air Capital Linux Users Group on the web at http://www.aclug.org