[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Civ II player puzzled by ICS strategy (long)

[Aliaga <aliaga@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi!


Mike Jing Wrote:
>The differences are quite obvious:
>
>1) Obviously, you are playing CivII at the Deity level.

Umm, yes. At lower levels it was easier to flood the map with cities. I
assume Freeciv games against humans are harder than even CivII's Deity
level.    :-)


> By default, Freeciv starts out with 4 content citizens in each city, which
corresponds to King

Phew, that's quite a big difference. It seems to me this could be fine-tuned
in the rulesets to match harder levels? It would seem more logical to me
than patch out the city center.


>2) By default, there is no second "number-of-cities threshold" in Freeciv.  

In fact, I'm not sure this was a real threshold as much as a secondary
effect of the increased corruption as the empire spreads. The "Very Unhappy"
arised whenever trade/luxuries/elvises fell below some level. They were
explained in the helpfile.


>You get a one-time penalty only at around 13 cities.

Funny thing is, I hated that penalty and upped the number to around 18,
partly to help the AIs, too. Even so, the stall happened.


>3) There are no "very unhappy" citizens in Freeciv.

They may be not that important. Corruption and unhappiness alone could cause
severe stalls. "Very Unhappy" just made them worse. More micromanagement,
too. But made Republic and Democracy "interesting" by not allowing the
player to slip into carelesness.


>Therefore, you will not have any happiness problems if you keep your cities 
>at size 3 or smaller under republic.  No need for martial law, and your 
>science is greatly boosted by the sheer number of your cities. Basically, 
>you can expand forever -- there is no "artificial" limit (sarcasm intended). 
>  The result?  ICS rules in Freeciv.

I'd propose to "up the level" on the rulesets/servers to at least "Emperor"
and see if ICS is still the rollercoaster it seems. The need for martial law
really slows settler production, and everything combines to stall the "pure
ICS" strategies.

I believe that even in a "king level" setting, corruption could play a key
factor in limiting the economics of ICS.


>There might be other more subtle differences, but I think these are the most 
>important concerning ICS.

Since I played mostly big-landmass maps and only very few islands-only
games, could it be that ICS + Ironclads wins only when "ruling the seas" is
the key?


>BTW, to be successful at ICS in CivII Deity, you absolutely need the Hanging 
>Gardens.  As restrictive as it is, CivII still has a loophole in it that 
>allows ICS even at the Deity level. For details, see DaveV's ICS Strategy 

Ah, yes. I would not call that a loophole. Nothing helps against corruption
but the higher Govts. But the Gardens (or Bach's, or Mike's) really change
the name of the game. The "small" cities start celebrating and growing and
supporting themselves, at which point I switch to cash + Diplomats and Game
is Over.


>Finally, I am working on a couple of patches to close these loopholes in 

I'm looking forward to be able to play this great game. Hope those (or
other) workarounds open other ways to win multiplayer besides ICS.

        M.A.

------------------------------------------------------------------
This email is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to 
whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the 
author and do not necessarily represent those of Sema Group. 
If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this 
email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or 
copying of this email is strictly prohibited.
------------------------------------------------------------------