[Freeciv-Dev] Re: War/Peace

[Tomasz Wegrzanowski <maniek@xxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 04:52:14PM +0100, Arkadiusz Danilecki wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2000, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 02:29:21PM +0100, Arkadiusz Danilecki wrote:
> [cut]
> > > 
> > > 1) score. Additional pts for peace periods? Sometimes we forgot that in
> > > civ should be three ways of winning: wipe all civilisations, reach alpha
> > > centauri, _or_ having bigger score at the end of game.
> > 
> > Don't do it. Score should be only about *present*state*of*the*world*,
> > and have nothing to do with civ's history.
> 
> What about - current peace period?

What about ( one or more of, scaled ):
- pop per military unit
- minus pop killed in martial actions per pop actually living

> > 12)
> > make ai breaks treaties as often as necesary
> 
> > 13)
> > Do not make `buy city (x2)' option.
> > If someone wants to buy your city, he can do it by negotiation
> ? 

Buy city was option in payciv that you paid twice as much for city, but
  you didn't break treaty.
You can negotiate with players about gold/cities/techs/maps exchange.
This mechanism should be used instead of buy_city, because :
- ai have to be smart, not fooled by
- NO ONE will use buy_city against human player, guess why

> > 14)
> > Do not make any reputation mechanism
> > This fools ai only
> reputation mechanism could be only for decision if senate would allow
> war/force peace etc. It has to be reputation of some kind to implement
> this, or it will do it randomly which i don;t like.

senate should (choose one) :
- *never* allow any warfare
- allow warfare according to *clean*algorithm*with*all*data*in*public*

> > 15)
> > Make diplomacy optional.
> > Ai is *always* stupid about diplomacy in every game I know,
> > because it needs medium and long-term planing, and
> > it plans only next movement
> > And diplomacy between players is best solved w/o any
> > state-of-the-world support.
> 
> well, ai should know at least about war/peace state. I saw civilized flag
> in player_ai, i could use it that if civilised==1 ai won't break peace
> (very often) and if civilised=0 it will. In republic and democracy it will
> break peace on the same rules as will do senate.

ai should always do what is the best for it.
Remember that player will *always* break peace if he thinks
that this will give him major advantagement.
The main reason our ai is so good is that it *don't*trust*anyone*.

16)
If we will make peace system too strong, there will be only
1 way to win - expand like crazy.
Now, with killcitizen=0 + a few other options, you can win by
world-wide-war (www) since the begining.