[Freeciv-Dev] Is the city names patch good?

[Takacs Gabor <tg330@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello!

I write about a patch added to Freeciv on Dec 6.

The description of the patch (from changes.txt):

> Add the ability to structure the city names of nations based
> on the (surrounding) terrain. For this city_name_suggestion now
> take the position of the city.

I think this patch has more disadvantages than advantages:
(I apologize to the author :-)

1. In an "avarage" Freeciv game I think there are a lot more
   coastal cities than non coastal cities.
   And there are only few river cities.
   In the real world there are a lot of river cities, and a
   lot of non-coastal cities too.

   The effect:
   Big & important & historical cities have great chance not to
   appear in the game. (If they are river or non-coastal cities)
   I tried the patch with the English and after playing for a long
   time the server hasn't offered Manchester as a city name yet!

2. I like when the capital of a nation is their real capital.
   It makes the game more interesting.

   Why is it good that the capital of the English is mostly Blackpool?
   Or if there is a chance that the American capital will be Riverside?

3. The patch makes the development of the nation rulesets more difficult.
   For example the developer has to decide what to rank as a river.
   And if the ranking of 2 developers is is different that will appear
   as confusion and chaos for the Freeciv players.

4. Currently more then half of the nations (especially small and fantasy
   countries) doesn't use the new city naming method. Updating the
   rulesets of these nations is particulary difficult.

I think the old city naming method (sorting the cities by economical and
historical importance) is simple and excellent.
I suggest to go back to it.

I know I am only one opposer.
What is the opinion of others?

Gabor