[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Comments on CMA 2.6

[Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Oct 24, 2001 at 01:26:49PM -0400, Daniel L Speyer wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Jason Dorje Short wrote:
> 
> > Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2001 at 03:35:44AM -0700, Raahul Kumar wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > No why should it? Which one should CMA use if you have two
> > > > > > > combinations which only differ in food. It chooses the one with 
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > bigger food value.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You won't like the answer: It should choose the one with the lower
> > > > > > value and leave the better tile for another city.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I must have been asleep. Why should the CMA leave the better tile for 
> > > > another
> > > > city? At this stage we do not know if there is even another city. If I 
> > > > missing
> > > > some prior details set me straight.
> > > 
> > > Consider this case: the user wants that food isn't considered and two
> > > combinations exists which each yield the same amount of the stats
> > > except food. Then the CMA would choose the combination which would
> > > yield less food because this increase the chance that this combination
> > > doesn't allocate a good food producing tile (which them may used by
> > > another city).
> > 
> > This is a classic operations research problem.  Once you get the weights and
> > minimum values for each resource, the algorithm to choose one should be
> > simple.
> > 
> > If a weight of zero is chosen, it should be assumed the user doesn't care
> > what happens to this tile.  The elegant way to avoid consuming a resource is
> > to make its weight negative.  You can still set the minimum value for that
> > resource (to 0 or 2, depending on the situation) to guarantee that you have
> > enough.  As far as the sliders go, this should be a new setting "avoid this
> > resource" or something like that.
> > 
> > Another way to simulate this is to subtract some small value, say 1/10, from
> > each weight before computing.  If say w=10*w-1 for each weight, then you'll
> > introduce a small "avoidance" factor that will have the same effects.  This
> > may be done by the GUI code before passing the weights in or by the core
> > code after it receives the weights (the first would be preferable IMO).
> 
> Maybe this is getting too complicated, but wouldn't it be better if the
> CMAs took into account the reachability of squares from other cities?  I
> mean, if you are on the corner of a continent, so that only you can use
> the whales offshore, but there's also silk nearby, and the player doesn't
> care about food, it's still better to pick the whales.

This is also possible.

> Maybe that's just to much, though.

No it wouldn't be much more complex.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "Reality? That's where the pizza delivery guy comes from!"