Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: June 2000:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Goals: Civ2 -vs- Freeciv (was: Railroads and AI)
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Goals: Civ2 -vs- Freeciv (was: Railroads and AI)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: "Freeciv Development Mailing List" <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Jeff Mallatt" <jjm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Goals: Civ2 -vs- Freeciv (was: Railroads and AI)
From: "Sam BC" <sambc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 15:38:19 +0100
Reply-to: <sambc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

And I completely agree... sort of what I've been trying to say, thank you
for putting it more clearly Jeff...

SamBC

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Mallatt

>
> At 2000/06/19 09:43 , Sam BC wrote:
> >It entirely depends on what you see as the projects goals... as currently
> >stated, the goals are to produce a complete play-a-like... a lot
> of people
> >would prefer the goal of producing our own game based on Civ(II)...
> >
> >The two are not incompatible, as long as every feature added is
> done so in a
> >flexible way so that a fully play-a-like CivII mode (ruleset?)
> is supported.
> >That way everyone gets there way.
>
> The "Civ2" goal, as I interpret it, is to create a game that _can_ be very
> similar to Civ2.
>
> However, you may notice that the data directory contains a civ2 directory
> and a civ2.serv file -- these are the Civ2 compatibility mode.  The
> "native" Freeciv behavior is specified in the ./data/default
> directory, and
> may be different from the Civ2 behavior.
>
> You are correct in that the two goals are not incompatible.  And, I see no
> reason that Freeciv native mode can't diverge from Civ2 behavior, as long
> as Civ2 mode maintains as much compatibility as possible.
>
> Note that Freeciv native mode is already different from Civ2 mode: one
> recent example is the addition of land<->ocean transformation.
>
> jjm
>
>
>
>




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