[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Non-smallpox ruleset (Minimum distance between cities to 3

[Daniel Sjölie <deepone@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2001-02-07 13:08:59, Mike Jing wrote:
> Daniel Sjölie <deepone@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >I think large cities should be powerful...
> 
> I totally agree.  I am just point out that large cities are *already* very 
> powerful.  The problem is that it takes a lot of work to get them to such a 
> big size.  Making certain improvements cheaper will make it easier for them 
> to grow, while increasing the power of improvements would make large cities 
> way *too* powerful.

This is not to argue but to figure out if we understand each other: :)
Too powerful compared to what?  Compared to small cities?
You did agree that small cities should be a lot less useful...
I'm confused as to what You are saying...
The effect of more powerful improvements are really (except from making
improvements necessary and thus make larger cities more attractive) a
faster game - I don't think that's a bad thing really... As it is You
almost never get to modern age technologies...

Actually, a big part of why I like this solution is that I (as someone
else mentioned) think that improvements are way to weak as it is... I
would like to see improvements as something essential - not as something
You build when You have nothing else to build... I probably dislike this
just as much as smallpox...

Really - the natural solution to smallpox is to simply play with a
smaller map... :) I think the objection to some suggested solutions that
they "really just make the map smaller" is of no importance... I see
nothing wrong with "really just making the map smaller" in some way...

/Daniel

-- 
Now take a deep breath, smile and don't take life so seriously... :)