Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: November 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Comments on CMA 2.6

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Comments on CMA 2.6

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Freeciv Developers <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Comments on CMA 2.6
From: Gregory Berkolaiko <gberkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 15:14:50 +0000 (GMT)

 --- Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26,
2001 at 03:43:43PM +0100, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> >  --- Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
> > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 06:07:04PM +0100, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> > I thought about this a little.  My conclusion was that it is easier
> > to get a balanced solution if you use the value function
> >   T_weight*(max_T - T)^2 + P_weight*(max_P - P)^2
> > 
> > T = trade
> > P = production
> > max_[TP] is maximal attainable [T/P] in the city (possibly given a
> > constraint on minimal food).
> Looks sane. How can this modus and the current one be merged? Just an
> extra flag in cma_parameter to enable the method above?

However in my heart I am against giving too much choice to the user.
Maybe it is possible to realise all the currently available settings
through the quadratic model?  If it is not too hard to implement, maybe
do it as a choice initially and then give to Christian to test and pass
the verdict?

>       Raimar
> -- 
>  email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>  "SIGDANGER - The System is likely to crash soon" 

Well this is exactly what freeciv is doing in Dangerous danger case :)

Nokia Game is on again. 
Go to and join the new
all media adventure before November 3rd.

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]