[Freeciv-Dev] Re: civserver segfault with new research system (PR#1221)

["Ross W. Wetmore" <rwetmore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 02:16 PM 02/01/18 +0100, Reinier Post wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 09:24:25AM +0100, Raimar Falke wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 02:49:48AM +0100, Reinier Post wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 12:17:32PM +0100, Raimar Falke wrote:
>I'm not happy with this.  Barbarians start out smarter later in the game,
>so which wouldn't they become smarter according to the same rules?  Why
>insist on treat barbarians in a special way?
>
>Another example: a barbarian takes the city with the Great Library.
>Will the barbarians get its benefits?  Why not??
>
>> We can make another mode which includes the barbarians. Player than
>> may see a motivation to destory a barbarian.
>
>I just think barbarians should be normal players whenever possible, otherwise
>you're only complicating the code and contradicting user's expectations.

It is useful to introduce "personality" traits for barbarians that influence
them to play in a certain aggressive, suicidal style without concern for
game goals.

There is no reason to assume that players, even AI players wouldn't or
couldn't also exhibit the same personality traits, or subsets of them.

The code can follow different codepaths based on such traits, but there
shouldn't be any assumptions that game effects are not equally applicable
to one specific "player", or that setup and init functions needn't fully
allocate certain player constructs because this is a barbarian, or an AI
or a human.

Any assertions to the contrary are not sane and should be removed from
and/or corrected in both the mind and the code, right :-?.

>>      Raimar
>-- 
>Reinier

Cheers,
RossW
=====