Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: November 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Clearing your backlog

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Clearing your backlog

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Gregory Berkolaiko <gberkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxx>, freeciv development list <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Clearing your backlog
From: Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 01:14:47 -0800 (PST)

--- Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Just go ahead. However I would also greatly appreciate any extra eyes
> on the patches in the backlog. For example is the AI-railway patch a
> good idea based on the fact that it may make it easier for an attacker
> to capure a continent? This is a question were I have no answer yet.

There is no good answer for this question. It's a tradeoff. The AI can be
much better at attacking with this patch, if it has a lot of cities on
a large landmass map, and the human player has fewer cities on the same
continent. In large landmass scenarios this is a big win.

There are scenarios where it can be much worse though. 3 equal size islands
controlled by the ai. I land a big invasion force on one island, capture
the capital and split the ai in half. Game winner. I believe this scenario
is where the problem lies. If the ai capital and wonder cities are well
protected, this might not be much of a problem. 

On balance, it makes sense to allow railroads. It also makes it much easier to
reinforce cities as well. I think that

a) improves attack a lot
b) mixed blessing as far as defense goes, but it is not certainly a negative.

Anyone else want to make comments about the desirability of the ai building
cross country networks? 

> > I'm wondering which patches you are currently working on. Maybe I can give
> > you a detailed review of problems areas for some patches you are not yet
> > sure of, and help cut the backlog.
> > Raimar, will we see CMA 2.7 any time soon?
> Doesn't look like so.
> > Would you accept a patch that updates the CMA 2.6 to compile against
> > current CVS?
> You may do this (you have to cope with the new city dialog for
> this). However note that I will only accept the CMA after it has the
> ability to save presets and let the user manage them. This includes
> changes to client/attribute to handle two types of attributes:
> server-saved and client-saved. But these have to be access through the
> same (existing) interface. So there is a lot of work to do. And so
> little time available.

I was just thinking of fixing it to cope with the new city dialog. If I have
to do all the rest as well, I think I'll go back to server side AI.

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.

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