[Freeciv-Dev] Re: More on (un)happiness

[Jesdyn Flamestrike <jesdynf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Dec 03, 2000 at 01:28:52PM +0000, Paul Dean wrote:

> That might work, but if I'm right, it main effect would be just to
> make the game very slow.  And much more bloody(because you'd want to
> take over enemy cities rather than make your own).

Smallpox is fast.

I was real big on city development in MoM. Real big -- as in, I wasn't
stepping foot outside my home city [if I could avoid it] until I finally got
that War College and Fantastic Stable online.

I was a darn slow player. Darned effective too; the AI, which was darned
expansionist, kept sending these midrange units after me which just didn't
compare to my city's endlevel units.

If you want to encourage city development, you may -have- to slow the game
down. [Or speed it up in other ways. Any ideas on how to accelerate play (a
la Stars! "Accelerated (BBS) Play") without comprimising basic play?]

And it might not make it all -that- bloody. Ten turns out of the everything
needed to get a city up to snuff isn't a lot when you balance it against the
effort it'd take to knock down one of your opponents -heavily-developed-
cities -- remember, he's been building his cities up just like you.

Of course, you could just nuke it... but I think it's safe to say that if
nukes are in play, then we've -definitely- suceeded in our goals. (:

-- 
Asher Densmore-Lynn <jesdynf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>