[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Development Strategies [Was Documentation, Usability and Development]

[Andrew Sutton <ansutton@xxxxxxx>]

On Monday 10 December 2001 03:58 pm, Jason Short wrote:
> Tony Stuckey wrote:
> >     MoM has 2 separate but overlaid maps; bizarre interconnected unit,
> > building, and faction rules; a completely different combat system with a
> > tactical sub-map; a research tree where major parts are locked out and
> > gift techs and research bonuses are chosen at game start, etc.  *SO* much
> > in both the server and client would have to change to even present this
> > sanely.
>
> I think many of these shouldn't be as big of obstacles as you're making
> them out to be.
>
> - The research tree where parts are locked out could be simulated by
> providing nation-specific initial techs.

i've been giving this alot of thought lately and been writing down some 
ideas. i think the general solution to this is to define a general "allows" 
relationship that connects any 2 elements in the game. for example, a 
technology "allows" the construction of some unit.

here, the relationship is between nationality and technology. being a player 
of the undead race "allows" the raise dead technology. this lets this concept 
become a ruleset configuration.

> - The different nation building abilities (units and buildings) can also
> be simulated by providing nation-specific initial techs.

same for above. being a player of the elven race "allows" the construction of 
elven archers and trees.

> - The different combat system (the swords/shields thing) should be easy
> enough to set up.

i'm still thinking about units. at the very core, units are essentially a set 
of capabilities - like in Civ games. however, they can be extended to include 
a set of properties (SMAC) that a) allow capabilities (e.g. flight) or b) 
affect some algorithm (combat). units can be further extended to contain a 
set of items (sword, shield, wand, etc). that perform the same function as 
properties.

>
> But the problems remaining are still tremendous.  Most notably:
>
> - The combat sub-map would be very difficult, most likely impossible
> under the real-time system FreeCiv currently uses.

i think its possible... it's just a little "sub-game". essentially, input 
from two (or more?) players is redirected to a sub-map. once that game is 
finished, input is re-directed back to the main game.

> - The different city setup would also be a difficult problem.  Instead
> of being assigned to tiles, workers are just made into "farmers" or
> "workers" (or, under MoO2, "scientists"), each of which produces a
> certain amount of food and "production".  It wouldn't be insurmountable,
> but it's definitely a different system.
>
> - The change from "trade" (=tax+research+luxury) to a "gold"+"power"
> (=mana+skill+research) system would also be a huge change.  Then you
> need to start thinking about things like handling skill points, and
> overland spellcasting.

encapsulation of algorithms within an object. you can dynamically feed the 
parameters for the algorithm for the ruleset. however, since buildings and 
global effects also feed that algorithm, they need to be fed in as 
appropriate.

rambling... rambling... rambling...

andy