Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: August 2002:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: asynchronous unit moves

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: asynchronous unit moves

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Raimar Falke <rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: asynchronous unit moves
From: Paul Zastoupil <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 12:01:53 -0700

On Thu, Aug 22, 2002 at 02:13:11PM +0000, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > Remember, we're not suggesting that each player has his own turn. We're
> > > suggesting partitioning up the turn so that each player moves in one part
> > > of the turn.
> >
> > And why only the movement?
> The suggestion is to split the movement in a turn into alternating
> sequences or phases. The reasons have been explained many times.
> I like to play Freeciv as a game of strategy, not as a clickfest where the
> player with the faster connection, nintendo-trained reflexes and who has
> memorized every keyboard hotkey wins the battles and ultimately the game.
> > Because games with the above modification will take a longer time. I
> > don't know how much longer. But if it is a factor of 5 or higher I
> > would say that you would need PBM or similar things.
> The original post claimed it would not be slower. I think it would be
> slightly slower, but only marginally so, and not by more than a factor of
> X, where X=the number of players or teams, in the worst case.
> Only testing will tell exactly how much slower it will be on average,
> though.
> Obviously, this is most useful for games where you have two players or two
> teams, and less useful for each additional player/team added.

What about a server that keeps running and just emails the person when its
their turn?

Paul Zastoupil

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