[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [freeciv-data] Re: Re: Alternative nation dialog

[aliaga <aliaga@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 01-03-02 09:11 -0400, you wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, aliaga wrote:
> > That would be cool, having each WoW named and portraited differently
> > according to who and when built it. Also, that more than one tribe could
> > build their version of same WoW.
>
> That last would defeat the idea of its being a Wonder of the World.
Not quite, at least for some WoWs. Let more than one tribe have unsinkable 
trirremes. Let everybody who can afford them build the Pyramids and have 
free Granaries. After all, who should be able to build them in Egypt and 
ban the Aztecs in Mexico to do the same? Some WoWs could get lowered 
effects when other tribes had them too. Still other WoWs can get their 
effects void or even reversed when certain other WoWs are built.
So, just have some flags defining the possibilities and let people play 
with the increased options. Should be fun.

> My point was that a lot more people have probably heard of, perhaps even
> visited, Stonehenge, over many more centuries, than ever even knew that
> some Italian chap who rediscovered parts of astronomy thousands of years
> later still has his lab on display as a tourist attraction. Stonehenge was
> a wonder of the *really ancient* world, before the so called wonders of
That's what I'd like more of having them defined and portraited differently 
according to the circumstances. Broader knowledge of these things thrown 
upon the unsuspecting player :-)

> the ancient world came along. Egyptian and Greek temples were also aligned
> by astronomy, it seems to havbe became quite fashionable sometime around
> 2500 through 1500 B.C although the book "How the Shaman Stole the Moon"
> also discusses how most of the old tribes of North America - at least the
> vanished ones like the Anasazi - used notches in canyon edges and such as
> well as buildings. Basically astronomy was such an ancient develoment that
Well, you are making my point that some WoWs ought to be doable by 
everybody :-)

> How do you *get* enemy cities to come over to you like that? In Civ1 I had
> it happen in "Prince level difficulty" once when I tried that level to see
> what it did, but I usually played "Emperor" level as our in-house standard
> was earth map, 7 civs, Emperor difficulty, so that we could all compare
Yes, I played always like that. Silly luck, I guess, but I'm sure it was in 
the hardest level, half the world apart from my whealty empire, and 
aparently the AI was having a bad case of widespread unrest. I got a puny 
Sioux city in the middle of the USA, when I was still populating Eurasia. 
Spent half that game trying desperately to defend those new subjects of 
mine against the relentless AI...

> how well we did despite not having multiplayer. Is it something that only
> happens at "easy" levels of play? Or does it just take higher levels of
> rep at higher difficulty levels? It sounds like it may have good
> potential, especially, as you point out, against smallpox tactics.
It was almost common in the easier levels, but not so rare in Emperor, as I 
liked to play a max lux/max science/max money approach to the diploblitz. 
Missed it very much in civ2 :-(
I got even a city of mine given to the AI once! whoa! free tech when 
retaken! ;-)
So yes, I'm fairly convinced that things like that have definite potential. 
Think of the embarrassment some militaristic despotic guy would get when 
every now and then some city of his got converted to a neighbour (science 
advance of choice included!) and it can be calculated entirely on economic 
parameters.
That and the increased chance of Barbarian upraising in places where there 
were no military units around, were the worst hurdles Civ1 had against 
smallpox, when you managed well your unhappiness, of course.
I think it was part of the generic "disasters" approach that got forgotten 
in civ2.

> Some chancy developments could be interesting. Some techs that may turn
> good or bad, do your research and take your chances. Will your Cathedrals
> bring happiness or centuries of Dark Age?
Exactly my thinking. Easier to see if more generic names for things could 
be used, though.
See about Uranium: a bad thing to have nearby, even if you could get 
beautiful crystal vases pygmented with it to boost your commerce. But 
properly "deployed", awesome power, both for civilian and military matters. 
Then again, if you make bullets with it, you could get in serious trouble 
even if the things work as advertised.
Someone with a better imagination than mine take the example and make some 
more generic one, please, but I believe the case is clear, IMHO.

> Possibly name them more generically. I'd also like to see some Wonders for
> the Modern era, such as The Internet, which functions pretty much akin to
> the Great Library, another example of a Wonder that was destroyed
> re-arising centuries later.
A really interesting option, being able to rebuild WoWs that did not pass 
"the test of time".
Some fun to have, too, if one player built a WoW and decided to call it 
"The Tits of Venus" and have the effect of Women's Suffrage. Another reason 
to beat him to it, hehehe.

> A "World Food Bank" or "End World Hunger
> Project" would be good too, maybe acting as a Food Bank (granary) in all
> cities throughout the world instead of within one nation. (I implement
> some of these ideas in my Proxima Centuri modpack. Communism required.).
Hummm, what about "my WoWs extend their benefits to my allies"?

Or even "my WoW and your WoW cannot be allied, sorry"... maybe because of 
ill effects not present when belonging to different tribes.

> Actually I was thinking of "War Measures Acts" and so on. Canada didnt
> seem to have much problem reverting during the Quebequoi (sp?) "crisis".
Who knows. Real life things tend to be not so clearly cut as in the game.

My 0.02E