[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Thoughts about corruption

[Gregor Zeitlinger <zeitling@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> The important consideration is balance.  Obviously it would be bad to
> have 0 corruption just because you've got railroads; so physical distance
> (or something other than travel time) must still play a role.
why should it be bad to have 0 corruption. After all, it's only a relative
value, which means relevant is the effective trade output, not the
corruption level (for realism it may be different, but for realism we
could also incrase all trade by 1.5 and then make corruption 1/3 :))

> But the benefit of Kevin's suggestion is that it rewards players who
> develop infrastructure; in other words, it favors the "perfectionist"
> strategy more than it does the smallpox strategy.  That's a good thing.
that's definitly a point - against it, if you look at it. It's much
easier to connect cities if you just have to build one road in between,
rather than 4.

-- 
Gregor Zeitlinger      
gregor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx