Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: April 2000:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Freeciv and Civ II

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Freeciv and Civ II

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Freeciv and Civ II
From: Jeff Mallatt <jjm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 14:05:19 -0400

At 2000/04/27 10:40 , Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 27, 2000 at 02:30:58AM +0200, Egbert Hinzen wrote:
>> AFAIK there was the idea that Freeciv should become compatible to
>> Civ II... 8-)
>> All programming work (except debugging) of around the last 9 months added
>> some more or less useful new features but nothing was done to get it
>> Civ II compatible... Documentation is missing, too. 8-(
>What is needed for compatibility excluding pacts and fundamentalism ?

This is the (all-inclusive) list I have of what I believe is needed to be
"close enough" to both Civ1 and Civ2:

- Civ2 style diplomacy:
  - Reputation.
  - Diplomatic states: Alliance, Peace, Neutrality, Cease Fire, War.
  - Senate.
  [In progress.  Called the "Pacts" patch.]

- Civ2 style supply/demand based trade routes.
  [In progress.]

- Civ2 style Waste (like Corruption, but for shields).
  - Should use separate ruleset values from corruption,
    but could/should use the same algorithm/code.

- Civ1 style Disasters.
  [In progress.]

There are of course many more niceties that could be added, but I believe
the above to be the minimal set needed to be "close enough" to compliance.

Note that Fundamentalism is not on the list.  There seems to be a pervasive
opinion that it is too powerful.  As far as I'm concerned, if someone wants
to implement it, I'd be happy to include it in at least the Civ2 ruleset.
Once implemented, we don't have to include it in the Default ruleset.


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