Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: March 2000:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Advanced barbarians / neutral cities
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Advanced barbarians / neutral cities

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv dev <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Advanced barbarians / neutral cities
From: martin <martin.mcmahon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 20:31:56 +0000

Hello Masheikh you must include us Scots in the Barbarian grouping ,the Romans
could not tame the Scots and told Rome that the land to the north Britain was
filled with wild uncontrolable clans of people (in other words Barbarians)
.it was the clans that first formed the Monarchy in Scotland and then into the
kings of Scotland .so I think it should be possible for Barbarians to gain
towns and get new units just like a real nation.just that it should not be
going to win the game by using the space race.
can you think what it would be like on a Barbarian space ship.:) 

On 08-Mar-00, Masheikh wrote:
>> If you are going to make the barbarians realistic, the first thing to
>> remember is that in the real world, barbarians were not a single monolithic
>> tribe. Realistic barbarians will fight among themselves if there is no one
>> else to attack. Also, in the real world, there were two major barbarian
>> uprisings that conquered most of the known world: Alexander the Great's
>> armies, and Ghengis Khan's hordes. Both of them appeared out of nowhere and
>> over the course of a decade or two proceeded to sweep over enormous areas
>> defeating everyone in their way, stopping only with the death of their
>> leaders.
>> 
>> Mark
> 
>     I agree with you in the point that the hords of Ghengis Khan can be
called
> barbarians as well as the Hunns under Atilla but u can't call the greek
> under Alexander the great, although HE was an Makkodonian, barbarians.
> 
>     A problem is that if you give them more power, maybe more units or
cities
> you make them more and more equal to normal ai- nations. I think barbarians
> shoul be a disaster that maybe every 500years comes over u in a greater
> number than 2 or three units. Maybe every 500years up to 20 units should
> enter the world to attack and destroy everythink. This includes that
> conquered cities are burned to the ground. barbarians should be an short but
> hard disaster, not abel to conquer an empire but destroy it.
> 
>> - automatically give them settlers from time to time
>> - make BIG chance that city in disorder convert to barbarian
>> - give barbarian special government
>> - give barbarians techs depending on world's techs
>> - set happiness level for the whole empire :
>>  happiness = (happy_pop - 2*unhappy_pop - cities) / pop * gov_modifier
>> - make units w/o upkeep automaticaly convert to barbarians
>> - make change for cities to change to barbarians depending on :
>>  distance_to_your_capital / happiness - make BIG chance that city that it
>> revolting because of diplomat doesn't convert
> 
>     barbarians should not become an equal nation, barbarians didn't use to
have
> cities thats why they are barbarians. they plundered the land as long as
> they could and moved to conquere the next after that. the hunns as well as
> the mongols where NOMADIC wartribes on horses, not with legions ;-)
> 
>> - disallow disbanding, you may still free unit, but it will convert to
>>  barbarian
>> - make BIG chance that unit damaged after battle convert to barbarians
>> - make chance for units to change to barbarians depending on :
>>  ( distance_to_your_capital + distance_to_your_nearest_city ) / happiness
> 
>     yes - as well as barbarias represent anarchy in all forms maybe this
could
> also include the uprising of units. remember the history of cartago who had
> to fight their own army after the first war against rom, because they wanted
> to disband them.
> 
>>> on the one hand it is very hard to manage such a system but on the other
>>> hand as far as freeciv uses to be a picture of the real world religion is
>>> needed indeed.
>> 
>>     I'm not sure this sentence makes any sense at all.  Are there words
>> misspelled/missing from this?
> 
>     i just wanted to express that religion is important, if freeciv wants to
be
> an "real-life-history-simulation" because religion is part of the
> real-life-history and present as well and so religion should be implemented
> in any way but i think it will be hard to find this way.
> 
> i hope u get me
> cya Masheikh
> 
> 
> 
> 
Regards
-- 
  
Chat on #Rabble  uk3.arcnet.vapor.com port6667
Get Freeciv at http://www.freeciv.org




[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]