Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Civil war patch and ruleset.

[David Pfitzner <dwp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tony & <stuckey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 1998 at 09:39:26PM +0100, Nicolas BRUNEL wrote:
> 
> > I'd prefer that units in a stack either slay each other or
> > move randomly one adjacent and ennemy free square.

I prefer this (well, the second one) too.  And to overcome the problem 
of when such a square is not available, teleport just a _short_ way 
to the nearest such square.  This could even work regarding boats: 
units on the opposite side to the boat can get moved to a nearby
friendly boat, or be "dropped off" at the nearest shore.

>       All advances learned by the master civilization should be learned
> by both sides of the civil war.  There's simply no other rational way to do
> it.  As to what's being researched right now ... I'm not sure that I see
> a reason to change that, either.  Losing research points sucks.

I agree, don't adjust science/research at all seems best.

> > -Concerning ruleset, i was happy to come back to civI.
> > But it reminds me of another game Xconq where ai is soo dump.
> > In this game, there is no predefinite units, terrains or rules.
> > It's impossible to have a good ai for Xconq.

My freeciv rulesets patch compromises: with the current rules (which 
become the default) the AI does exactly as it does now.  If you use 
different enough rules, the AI might become dumber, unless someone
spends more time improving the AI to cope better.

> > It would funny if the ruleset langague  sticks to GDL : the lisp like
> > langague
> > of Xconq so that someone with time enough can clone freeciv using GDL.

Really, my rulesets mainly amount to just adjusting sets of parameters,
not doing arbitrarily complicated things.  And I'm not a fan of lisp :-)

-- David