[Freeciv-Dev] Re: comments on ics solutions

[Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 06:23:31AM -0500, Mike Jing wrote:

> More importantly, I see ICS as a symptom of a much bigger problem.  I still 
> maintain that there should be a constraint on expansion, for the benefit of 
> game balance.  The unhappiness rules do exactly that, in addition to 
> eliminating ICS.  And it takes little effort to implement because most of 
> the code are already in place.

Yes, but the unhappiness with unhappiness is the symptom of a different
problem: rules based on limits instead of a gradual effect.  If
unhappiness was a gradual effect, if it increased corruption and
production little by little, it would be easier to handle, because
the effect would be gradual, you could see it coming.

> >but this could also be achieved with a unhappiness which depends on the 
> >form of the government and the distance (or as someone proposed the 
> >travel-distance) from the capital (like corruption). so there would not be 
> >a sudden penalty for all the cities but a more intuitive penalty for remote 
> >cities.

Unhappiness could *be* corruption, plus waste.
 
> It already depends on the government.  I was also thinking about making the 
> penalty more gradual as you have described above, which is closer to Civ2 
> behavior anyway.  Maybe I would actually implement it if more people would 
> see things my way.  ;-)

Having a gradual effect makes it easier to understand what's going on,
which would be great; the game would still be much slower than smallpox.

> Thank you.  :-)  That's what frustrates me the most: people just don't seem 
> to see the benefit of marketplaces/banks.  But I guess I can't blame them.  
> Those things are absolutely unnecessary under default rules.

True; I didn't know they had any effect on luxury.
 
-- 
Reinier