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

[Thue <thue@xxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 05 Dec 2000 17:11:15 Mike Jing wrote:
> >From: Greg Wooledge <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: ½²«íµØ <iquin@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >CC: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: More on (un)happiness
> >Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 22:54:53 -0500
> >
> >½²«íµØ (iquin@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> >
> > > Can you produce settlers for expansion with citysize=1?
> >
> >Under Despotism or Monarchy (or Communism) you can use military units
> >in the city for martial law.  Just keep a Warrior or Phalanx in the
> >city and you'll still be content at size 2.
> 
> That's correct.  You need to use martial law unless you set the luxury
> rate 
> sky high.
> 
> >Under Republic/Democracy... well, that's where it gets "interesting".
> >;-)
> 
> Actually, it is still possible to produce only settlers with
> unhappysize=1 
> under Republic if you set the luxury rate high enough.  That's why the
> small 
> pox strategy still works even if you set empire_size_inc to 1.
> 
> I just had another idea: how about making it an option to adjust the 
> distance allowed between cities.  It used to be 0 as in Civ1.  Now it's 1
> as 
> in Civ2.  If it is possible to set it to 3, I suspect that smallpox will
> be 
> much less useful.  Of course, this should be  just an option, so people
> who 
> want to stick to their old playing style still have the choice.
> 
> Mike

How about letting new cities that at size 0, so to say, ie with only one
worked square.
And adjusting the increase in food it takes to grow a new citizen is also a
possibility. Rigth now small cities are heavily favored.

-Thue