[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Corruption Handling - Possible bug?

[Per I Mathisen <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 9 Jun 2002, Tony Stuckey wrote:
> > have it as a parameter in game.ruleset.
>
>       Yes, hard coded limits should be replaced with either #defines or
> some other mechanism.  IMHO, Corruption distance should be map size
> dependent.  36 is somewhere close to the max for CivII (32?).

I agree 36 should be put in a ruleset. I also agree with moving the
MIN(36, ) test further down, as Davide's patch does, so that 36 is always
the maximum distance.

> > 2. This is another matter, related to corruption, but less disputable
> > IMHO. Reading manual, Courthouse effect is to half the corruption in a
> > city. When the corruption is low, the actual code is behaves correctly,
> > but when corruption is set to a greater degree and the city is distance
> > from the capital is big, strange things may happen.
> > Imagine a city with output of 10 arrows, all of them taken from
> > corruption. I expect that after having built the courthouse, total
> > corruption is reduced to 5, but this is not the case if val is MORE than
> > total trade in the city, as can be easily seen reading the code.
> > Thus, my proposal is to put an if before courthouse effect, for capping
> > the val value. (if (val>trade) val=trade;)
>
>       This would be a real bug.

I am not so sure. This way courthose would always give you 50% of your
trade as income. I don't remember very well but was this how it was done
in civ2? At least, it is not this way in civ3. And this change makes
corruption _a lot_ less effective.

So I will not agree to classify this as a "bug fix" (even if it makes us
more civ2 compatible).

Ben, how is this solved for generalised improvements?

Yours,
Per

"It is difficult to catch a black cat in a dark room.
Especially if there is no cat there." - Confucius