Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Borders

[Tony Stuckey <stuckey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Aug 31, 1999 at 10:56:07PM +0200, Thue janus Kristensen wrote:
>     When dealing with other players you can more easyly determine when
> they are comming too close, and diplomacy becomes simpler . In SMAC it
> is an act of war to build a city within another persons territory. (note
> that you can nudge the border by building a city close to it.)
>     By reading some SMAC forums, and forums about upcomming civ3, it is
> my impression that borders is
> considered a great thing by most players, leading to better gameplay. It
> clearly makes the the game more
> realistic.
>     Firaxis (The company with Sid Meier and Brian Reynolds) who is
> developing civ3 is going to include borders, so obviously they still
> like the idea after SMAC
> 
> Of course it wont really work with computer players unless some kind of
> diplomacy system is implemented.
> You may be able to make a function to notify the player when an enemy
> enters your territory

        Moving into a city square with a worker in Civ2 caused different
actions based upon your war/peace status with the player owning the worker.
You would either get a dialog box "We have a treaty with XXX, are you sure
you want to do this?!", or you would displace the worker if you were at war.
        You could use national diplomacy options to tell people to remove
troops from your land in Civ2.
        I'm not sure what stronger concept of borders makes sense.  If
you're not using the land, why do you care if they build there?  If you do
care, then go kill their settlers.  Demilitarized zones, leapfrog
development with defensive units involved, and puffed-chest diplomatic
posturing are what the game's all about.  What real benefit do borders
give?
-- 
Anthony J. Stuckey                              stuckey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"When I was young, the sky was filled with stars.
 I watched them burn out one by one."  -Warren Zevon