Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: August 2000:
[Freeciv-Dev] idea
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] idea

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv-dev <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] idea
From: Lauri Tarkkala <ltarkkal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2000 13:50:06 +0300

I have long been annoyed looking at certain players base their strategy
over and over again on acquiring certain wonder. 

Nothing wrong with this really, but I feel the way these wonders are
acquired kinda sucks. I am sure everybody knows how it is done, one
researches trade, starts researching the tech for the wonder and
then builds caravans inbetween.

I feel there are some things which kinda bite:

- The "gain" from building the wonder with the production from one
  city really is negligible compared building a set of caravans in
  that same city, and then using these caravans to build the
  wonder when one has the required tech available.

  This means that from a risk management point of view, building
  wonders without using caravans to finish them in one round
  is quite foolish!

- The caravans represent trade! Trade with oneself is (probably ;)
  not as profitable as trade with somebody else.

I therefore am thinking of doing a patch which would add an optional
rule like the following.

The production value gained into building a wonder from a caravan
would be 

x = 25 + MAX(25,"points gained in gold/research upon establishment
                 of hypotethical trade route");

Obviously the base value has to be at least 25, otherwise players
would just disband their caravans (or other units).

This would encourage players to bring caravans from cities
further away when building wonders, creating potentially
interesting scenarios. Basic feature would be to restrict small
civilization from stacking up on caravans from the initial cities 
when building wonders.

Now I am curious, could some person more familiar with the Freeciv
source please tell me where would be the "proper" way to 
implement this option? 

(The hackers guide really does not tell me much, about how to do
 rule changes or optional rules...)

Any thoughts on the rule modification, would be appreciated aswell..

Lauri  

-- 
"The credit belongs to the man in the arena whose face is marred by dust and
sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs, and who comes up short again
and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends
himself in a worthy cause. The man who at best knows the triumph of high
achievement and who at worst, if he fails, fails while daring greatly, so that
his place will never be with those cold timid souls who never knew victory or
defeat." - Theodore Roosevelt



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