[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Suggestion: Growning cities

[Ashley Penney <ashp@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 06:03:57PM +0100, Jules Bean said:
> On Sat, Aug 26, 2000 at 06:19:53PM +0200, Ashley Penney wrote:
> > 
> > Hmm, I'm not good at putting this into words, but I worry that FreeCiv will
> > turn into Emacs, filled with absolutely everything anyone could think of.
> 
> And indeed, I edit this reply with emacs, as I do all my emails ;-)

I knew that was coming as soon as I wrote it. *grin*. 
> As long as the new features are 'encapsulated' in a way that the
> rulesets can get at then what we will see is a proliferation of
> different games using the same engine.  I see that as a great thing.

Well, that's one way to look at it.  I agree when it's put that way, I'd enjoy
seeing FreeCiv become an engine that was picked up by others for various games. 
:)
 
> > Rather than having a city spread over more squares, it would be a hell of a
> > lot more interesting to totally remove the concept of tiles, and simply
> > assign the units a "scouting distance", so a explorer could only see 50 
> > foot,
> > while a catapult could see much further (being much taller).
> 
> Agreed. (Well, I don't agree with that specific idea, but I agree with
> the concept).  Not that long ago, someone pointed out that doing away
> with tiles completely was the only totally elegant solution to the
> 'map freeciv onto a sphere' problem.  I think a tileless freeciv would
> be a nice thing to have.

I imagine that you'd basically have to throw away the entire source tree and 
start
from the beginning however.  The entire logic is based around tiles.

> > Anyway, I'm just throwing out some random ideas as I've seen mumblings about
> > redesigns, total changing of tech structure and so forth.  Is FreeCiv always
> > going to trail behind the "offical" games, or will you go for it and lead 
> > the
> > field? :)
> 
> Well, as always, that's up to the developers.  Which is not a closed
> club -- it's up to anyone with the time on their hands to be a
> developer.  If I had as much time to program as I waste writing emails
> ;-) then personally, yes, I'd be pushing freeciv away from its
> roots. But it ain't up to me!

Same here, I'm a player rather than a developer, which is why all I'm doing
is offering some thoughts, I won't try to demand they implement them.

Speaking of which, I have a demand! *grin*.  I want to be able to apply 
something
similar to capitalism (iirc, the improvement that doesn't build anything other 
than
money), but right from the start.  Maybe it should be "entertainment" or 
"idleness"
or something.  Normally with the tatics I play, I reach a certain point where I 
want
core citys to stay as they are, without building improvements due to lack of 
money
to pay for them.  One way around this is to build something, sell it for the 
cash,
repeat, blah, etc.  But I'd much rather have a non-tech-required option there 
from
the start, rather than having to wait until I've slaughtered everyone.

Is this feasible, suggestions? :) 

-- 
Ashley Penney | ashp@xxxxxxxxxxx
"People who claim they don't let things little bother
them have never slept in a room with a single mosquito."