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: Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx (Freeciv developers)
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: non-smallpox idea
From: "Ross W. Wetmore" <rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 20:01:33 -0500

At 11:04 PM 01/11/23 +0100, Reinier Post wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 22, 2001 at 02:10:58PM -0500, Jacky Mallett wrote:
>> The easiest way i can think of to fix that is to also make the corruption
>> fall off proportional to the number of cities in the empire. This would
>> things up between the two strategies, at least at the beginning of the
>> game. If science output (under despotism), became 1 after 2 cities, and 0
>> after 8 cities, this would effectively maintain the current status quo.
>Looks like a good idea, but I don't see the 'realism'.

The realism is that you have corruption proportional to the number of
population points in a city, but not to the number of population points
if you spread them out over many cities. As things currently stand this 
is the "unrealistic" behaviour that (somewhat unfairly) biases towards 
a smallpox strategy, especially since despotism is the form of government 
*least* able to project itself beyond the despot's immediate area of 

But the big lack is probably the Civ II waste rule. This kills production
for expansionist strategies like smallpox which tend to need a lot of room. 
If tied to global pop points as well as distance and local pop points, you 
would effectively kill almost any useful city output of the smallpox player 
cities after a fairly limited initial expansion.



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