Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: November 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Tech cost patch v8

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Tech cost patch v8

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Tech cost patch v8
From: Juha Litola <slave@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 23:21:26 +0200

On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 10:30:34PM +0200, Juha Litola wrote:
> > Why is this special case need for tech_cost_style == 0 in goal_tech_cost?
> Because costs for civ1 and civ2 style aren't consistent. Cost
> of technology changes when we research new techs. Following from
> that, goal_tech_cost just cannot be calculated in the same way
> as other styles.
Oh well, one oversight more. Currently goal_tech_cost for style 0
doesn't use tech_leakage. Problem with counting the goal cost for
style 0 is that there may be multiple different costs. Any of them
will probably do?

I'll make a new version tomorrow. It will move calculating tech_leakage
to own function and move find_prerequisites from
aitech.c to tech.c and use it in goal_tech_cost to calculate
estimate for style 0.

Own function for tech_leakage will need return value multiplied by
100 or it will underflow. 

Mighty mess, does anyone invent nicer way? Or should we just use
tech_cost even for style 0 version of goal_tech_cost and get slightly
wrong estimates if we have many parallel possible ways to fill
the requirements?

Literacy is an example of problem I'm talking about. Assume that 
tech_leakage style 1 is in effect.

      |             |
  Code of laws   Writing
         |       |

If many other players have invented writing (assume cost left is 25%), 
it's much cheaper to research first code of laws and after that writing, 
when unmodified cost is higher. 

// Juha Litola

Attachment: pgptnku6Mcubi.pgp
Description: PGP signature

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