Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: November 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: non-smallpox idea

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: non-smallpox idea

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Greg Wooledge <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: non-smallpox idea
From: Gregor Zeitlinger <zeitling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 15:08:19 +0100 (CET)
Reply-to: gregor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Sat, 24 Nov 2001, Greg Wooledge wrote:

> Gregor Zeitlinger (zeitling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > Another one I came up with, is to make it harder to rush your population
> > in Republic or Democracy. How about a parameter to set the minimum number
> > of citizens to rush-grow. 
> I have no objection to making this number configurable.  (Last time I
> checked, it was hard-coded.)
I just checked for it - its in govt ruleset. i'm thinking of creating a
ruleset of my own to implement a ruleset that makes it good strategy to
have many cities or just one or anything in between depending on the
I think not allowing caravans to help wonders is crutial for that.
I could make this an option.

> However, the ability to "pop-boom" under rapture in Republic/Democracy
> is what makes the NON-smallpox strategy viable.  If you take this away,
> then the non-smallpox strategy is dead in the water.
I've been mostly playing civ2 (well, before I knew freeciv) and my
successfull strategy was to smallpox and then pop-boom all cities to get a
comfortable lead in tech. That's way too good, IMO.


Gregor Zeitlinger      

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