[Freeciv-Dev] Re: language (was: Inertia)

["R. Miller" <richere@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 01:51 01-03-01 +0100, Reinier Post wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 05:16:19PM -0500, R. Miller added after quoting:
>
> > [...] I really like your ideas for implicit levels of trade between
> > cities and their fluctuation as a function of contact via units.
>
> The idea is to make trade work more like traderoutes by itself, by the
> way trade works in general.  I really like the idea of traderoutes but
> I find them too cumbersome to use in practical gameplay.
I really like trade routes, too, but I always find something more important 
to do
than produce and deliver caravans (but my wife relies on them to a great extent
and is really succesful in Civ2).

> > Concerning corruption, it occurred to me that corruption in normal
> > cities may represent not only crime, but the "waste" created by people
> > who resist a regime. If this were set to a really high value for
> > recently conquered cities, and then slowly rolled back with time as the
> > resistance dwindles, then I would expect that the effect would be that
> > of inertia.
>
> This is what the idea of 'language' tries to address: it is an attempt to
> introduce a notion of 'cultural coherence' that influences productivity
> (mainly, trade).  In conquest it should have roughly the same effect
> as your proposal, but it is more general.
I think I have understood that, and I agree. Also, I find that introducing a
cultural element such as language and "cultural coherence" opens the way
to different but equivalent starting characteristics for the various 
civilisations,
which I believe Civ3 is going to introduce.

> > However, I have never looked at the design and code of
> > Freeciv, so I really don't know what the ramifications would be, and I
> > must defer to your team of specialists.
>
> For corruption, you could start at
>
>   http://www.freeciv.org/lxr/source/server/citytools.c?v=cvs#L530
I have looked at the code, and find that the method of calculation is 
completely
different from that used in Civ2 for calculating corruption and waste (the same
formula is used for both in Civ2, except that the distance is halved).

> > You have discussed the integration of conquered cities at length, but
> > what of gradually increasing the effects of Wonders or of Knowldge
> > Advances?
>
> I don't know.  If the idea of cultural diversity can be shown to work
> well for trade it can be applied to everything else in principle.
> E.g. the effectiveness of units may be achieved.  But wonders are
> really a special case, with their 'all or nothing' effect.
That's my point - must Wonders have an all or nothing effect? Or an
initially significant effect and the gradually increasing effect up to a
maximum.

> > I don't expect that implementing these ideas will increase the
> > micromanagement; on the contrary, it should reduce it. Micromanagement
> > is possible because players can predict the precise effects of their
> > actions - building units or infrastructures. If the model becomes more
> > complex, players will have to pay more heuristically, or
> > probabilistically, and less arithmetically. Put more succintly, if the
> > model is too complex to figure out precisely in a given situation, the
> > player will follow their instinct or judgment instead - maybe players
> > micromanage because it's possible, or because they have to.
>
> I don't think this is how it works.  If better micromanagement would pay
> off, but you don't know how to improve, the game becomes frustrating.
> (I speak from experience.)  The math must not be hard, it must be natural.
>
> > Robaire
>
> --
> Reinier
I'll take your word for it.

Robaire