Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: November 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Reproducable core dump (PR#1051)

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Reproducable core dump (PR#1051)

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Gregory Berkolaiko <gberkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx, bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Reproducable core dump (PR#1051)
From: Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 14:56:45 +0100

> > > We should also introduce a check for ai.control: if the plane is
> > > controlled by AI (which doesn't happen now but will be surely added at
> > > some point), it wouldn't care if the tile is not seen -- AI cheats and
> > > peeks under fog.  But for that we should also introduce a constant
> > > AI_SEES_ALL and later it should probably become a variable in struct
> > > player.
> > 
> > 
> > This I disagree with.  True, the current AI cheats by looking under the fog
> > of war, but isn't that something to fix rather than promote?
> if we strip AI of this cheat it will become pathetically stupid I am afraid.
I vote for adding this as AI handicap. The AI will be at least less frustrating
for beginners (yeah, I still remember my first three FreeCiv games :-). However
I'm not going to code that, my TODO list is enough long now ;-).

> > If you must go this route, one idea would be to add a new server 
> > variable, aicheats, that is user-settable.  Enabling it would up the 
> > difficulty.  But I don't think any of the AI's (no matter how
> > difficult) should cheat by default.
The difference between normal and hard AI is IMHO mostly in cheating.
The AI won't be ever so smart as human can be, so it needs other ways
how to became comparable rival for human.

> Tony says look up ai_handicap()
> Raimar says see
They say same thing, don't they?

> what can I add? only that I think H_MAP looks to be the correct one,
> but the comment there is not that clear...
H_MAP would do IMHO.

> > > /* Planes _always_ use SINLGE_MOVE a time so here we can just use 1
> > > instead of SINGLE_MOVE */
> > 
> > Wait, is SINGLE_MOVE 1 for planes?  Should I use that instead?
> SINGLE_MOVE is 3 for everyone.
> you can use SINGLE_MOVE but you would have to multiply map_distance by
> SINGLE_MOVE too then.  Which is a completely unnecessary operation.
What about playing with THRESHOLD? (see another threads).


                                Petr "Pasky" Baudis

UN*X programmer, UN*X administrator, hobbies = IPv6, IRC
Real Users hate Real Programmers.
Public PGP key, geekcode and stuff:

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