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

[Aliaga <aliaga@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

At 12:06 11/01/01 +0100, you wrote:

>Servers with different rulesets are already running, see the metaserver.

It is on my "to do" list for this Century: Get steady link to the 'net,
spend endless hours playing ... let's wish...   :-)

Right now I'm playing a strategy PBEM, which I can afford with my tight time
schedule. The original Civs could certainly be re-engineered to be played
like that.


>The timeout can be changed during the game; on public servers any player
>can do this.  Many other settings can be changed as well.

Yes, but... how many people know the exact impact any of those changes can
have on a given game? By having some of them pre-set, neatly explained and
agreed upon on several different servers, things could be easier.


>Those are usually unfair.

I believe I'm not the only one who likes to try a "impossible" scenario
every now and then...   :-)


>We need player authentication before we can implement this reliably.

It's a matter of time, then, I assume.    :-)

Many people could get enticed to play endlessly by small things like that.


>I'm afraid we don't have enough players to do this well.

If I may quote The Good Doctor: "If enough people acts for a long enough
period of time, things happen".

I'd say just make sure young junior programmers get attracted to this thing
and it will get a life all by itself. Think Linux.    :-)


>This is an ambiguity within English: 'game' means both the game as a
>whole, and a specific instance of it.  Mike was referring to the game
>as a whole, and referring to the need for balance between game
>features, and between different possible strategies.  You are referring
>to a specific instance, and balance between players.  There's nothing
>wrong with the best player winning a game of Freeciv, of course.

It seems we all agree on that. But I try to be careful when calling
something a loophole. Let's face it: clever players will always find a new
way to up their performance. Not all of these will be "illegal" nor should
be banned. In a game based in a few rules, however complex their
interactions, the brain of the Homo Sapiens is bound to find some trick or
other... and remember the whole species is suspected to have a penchant for
war AND tricks... something in our DNA-based rules.txt, maybe...     :-)

My wish would be that for every possible "loophole" or "surefire" trick
there would be a way to nudge things so that successful strategies can be
waged against unavoidable defeat, thus allowing variety and fun to exist.

I know of at least one other good strategy game where that's the law of
life, and there exist at least twenty "unstoppable" ways to win... True, it
has needed a great deal of playtesting and bug-squashing and cheat-stomping
over the years, but it's my only other candidate to excellency against
Civilization.

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.
------------------------------------------------------------------