Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: March 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Idea/suggestion: Different heights

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Idea/suggestion: Different heights

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: "Per I. Mathisen" <Per.Inge.Mathisen@xxxxxxxxxxx>, freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: Idea/suggestion: Different heights
From: Raahul Kumar <raahul_da_man@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 04:25:21 -0800 (PST)

--- "Per I. Mathisen" <Per.Inge.Mathisen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2002, Raahul Kumar wrote:
> > They do climb hills all the time ;-). You're right in that the idea that
> anyone
> > would go climbing the Himalayan range is ridiculous. On the other hand, the
> > puny excuse for mountains in Europe(Alps) could be crossed by an overweight
> > elephant.
> You obviously haven't seen the mountain ranges here in Norway :-)

No responce to the elephant climbing mountain feat,eh ;-)? I'd like to see
anyone get so much as an overgrown rat over any himalayan range. Mind you,
living in Oz, we don't have a single decent mountain. 

> > So you are proposing that in real life cannons move close to an opponent
> before attacking?
> They move within range, yes. Even howitzers could not shoot from Bonn to
> Berlin, which would be about one tile distance in most *civ maps.

But, in real life, those howitzers could blow away any attacking units long
before they even got in range.

> > I hate the fact that currently if I battle Evil_Per, I cannot use tactics
> to defeat him. There is no way for me to use artillery on high ground,
> > combined tactics with aircraft and ground units to beat you. There is one
> and only one way to win. More units.

> Freeciv is not a tactical wargame, but a game of strategy. If you want to
> defeat me, attack where I am weak and defend where I am strong. Classical
> Sun Tzu. (I really recommend reading his book "The Art of War".)

When you are strong, feign weakness. When you are weak, feign strenght. Make
your enemy believe you far when close, and close when you are far away. Yes,
I've read him.

It's all a bit impossible to apply in the Freeciv situation. The only possible
targets for me to attack are cities. I'm saying there's no unexpected twists.
You won't suddenly have to start building pikemen/with catapaults to deal with
my marauding knights. There are a few boring winning strategies that work every
single time.

Build premier defensive unit 5-6, the rest are best attacking unit, cannon etc,
bring 3-5 diplos/spys and you can take over any civ. There's no need for
subs,legions,archers or destroyers/cruisers, phalanx. Even cruise missiles,
stealth bombers are strictly optional. No helis. No nukes.No subs. This
strategy cannot be countered. Your only option is to do it better. An example

The ultimate strategy in endgame

5-6 mech inf
As many howitzers as can be built

There are others for the ancient era and the industrial age. I don't even have
to mention them, no doubt you already know it.

You're set for a nice conquering spree. This kind of cheesy strategy is what I
dislike about Freeciv. I would enjoy it more if the player had to outthink his
opponent on the battlefield. Know yourself, and know your enemy, you will never
be in danger in a 1000 battles.


I hold little hope for humans unless they end their blind acceptance of
millennia of fallacious theological dogma. For example, I recall nibbling
through the Bible once ? someone had left a bit of Triscuit on John 12:35 ?
where I saw the most perilously capricious statement: "Walk while ye have the
light, lest darkness come upon you."

Hello? You must run from the light. You must scatter, for the light means

And also, developing an exoskeleton wouldn't hurt. 

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards®

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