Re: [Freeciv-Dev] 1.7.2

[Esben Haabendal Soerensen <ehs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 30 Oct 1998, NU Euren Leif wrote:

> Esben wrote:
> > A single to rearrange all workers in a city (from the city report),
> > or even better to rearrange all workers in all city.
> 
> Yes, yes! I'd love it!
> 
> > And what about an order list for what to build in cities ?
> I don't get it. What do you mean?

I'll take an example.  At a time when I have 20+ cities I start settling
on a new continent.  Every new city I build I want to build (in the listed
order):
 1. settler
 2. temple
 3. colleseum
 4. marketplace
 5. .....

I just want to be able to tell my client this.  So when the temple is
built it starts building a colleseum (instead of choosing something
"random").

The building orders could be made much more advanced.  Some thoughts:
 + making templates (premade order lists)
 + list of things NOT to build (eg. city walls in the middle of a peacefull
   continent).
 + possibility to specify when to buy the thing (or things) being built
   For example: build a battleship and buy it when 1/3 remains
 + a scripting language (I have heard that this should be available in the
   upcomming Civ game from microprose).

> Another thing I'd like to see is a rearrangement of the order in the
> improvement list. As it is now (I use a version of 98-09-30), first are
> city improvements in alphabetical order, then wonders (again in
> alphabetical order) and last Capitalization. This is a bit annoying,
> especially at later stages when you got lots of cities and are founding
> yet a new one (or conquering one of lower tech level) -- after the first
> improvement it gets on building an Airport, when it's a Granary or
> Harbour you need there.

An order list would partly solve this.

> Left to themselves, cities gets really silly when you get to 'P'. One
> city builds a Palace, and when it's finished, a Police Station. When the
> station is finished, another city has built the Palace, so this city
> starts to build a Palace again. After a while almost all the cities are
> competing building palaces, and valuable production is wasted.

I have never let it go that far.  I always spends lots of time adjusting
orders :-/
But this sounds really stupid, and we must come up with a better
scheme.

> I'd say a cost-order is more to the point, and I hacked in that order
> into version 1.6.3 which I played a lot this summer: First city
> improvements in cost-order (low-cost first, starting with Temple), then
> wonders (again in cost-order), then Palace and last Capitalization. With
> this scheme, cities can be leaved almost unattended -- only fine tuning
> is needed.

Yes, but you will end up with all your cities having everything!
Sounds quite expensive to me.  And you don't always have the time to
build everything.  You should never have the time to build everything
when playing against humans.  They would crush you ;-)

> When hacking this, I was amazed to note how well done the source is
> coded. All I did was to rearrange the enumeration type
> improvement_types_id in city.h and the improvement_types struct in
> city.c, and it worked! No one had used the actual value in the code, or
> at least I haven't noticed it :-)
> 
> Well folks... What d'you think?

-- 
/Esben  (bart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)

You want it in one line?  Does it have to fit in 80 columns?   :-)
             -- Larry Wall in <7349@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>