[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Freeciv] rfc: autoattack

[Gregory Berkolaiko <Gregory.Berkolaiko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Per I. Mathisen wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Gregory Berkolaiko wrote:
> 
> > I think this server-side autoattack is turning the gameplay (at least
> > single-player) upside down. I am strongly against it.
> 
> As I have tried to explain before, this is what you get for turning a
> turn-based game into a real-time game without thinking real hard about
> design problems. You get nastiness like autokill, to which there are only
> two proper solutions:
>  1) give everyone equal opportunity to use it (ie server-side), or
>  2) institute alternating movement phases within the same turn
> 
> Everything else is a kludge.

Right now we have two games in one:
1. Multiplayer game.
2. Playing against AI.

In game 2 there is no concurrent movement, it's strictly turn-based.  In 
game 1, so I hear, speed of clicking and connection is essential.

A poll taken a year ago shows that 70% of freeciv users play game 2.

My opposition to the AA patch is based on the feeling that it will have 
unpredictable consequences on game 2.  Attacking a city with AA units 
requires great degree of coordination between units.  Right now AI has 
only very basic coordination and will certainly not be able to do anything 
against AA.  It is easy to teach AI to employ AA.  It is far harder to 
teach it to overcome it.

The effects of introduction of AA, in my opinion, are far greater than
that of a huge rule-change like "shore bombardment is not fatal".  
However, these effects are very interesting.  If AI can be tought to 
handle it, we will have a completely new game on our hands and attract 
more players.  But it is a big "if".

I therefore ask for it to become an option.  Possibly a three-way option:
 1. AA doesn't work.
 2. AA doesn't work against AI players.
 3. AA works. 
The big problem is that it is feature creep.  If AI is taught to support
AA, it has to be taught to distinguish between options, which have huge
effect on the gameplay.  But I see no other way, apart from forking the
project, which is not desirable.

G.