Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: February 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Freeciv] Diplomacy

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Freeciv] Diplomacy

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: Freeciv Developers ML <freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Freeciv] Diplomacy
From: "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 12:34:43 +0000 (GMT)

On 17 Feb 2003, Davide Pagnin wrote:
> 2) As how to define 'contact' I think it should be defined this way:
> "If nation A unit enters nation B not-fogged area then a contact is
> made" (not needed to enter a city-radius, but two simple units that meet
> themselves should suffice)
> I haven't looked at the code, and perhaps this is just the case, now...

Now it is adjacency. Your suggestion will be very CPU intensive and
complex to implement.

> 3) After a 'contact' is made, a turncount down should start, (say 20
> turns), if no permanent diplomatic status is reached in the meantime,
> the 'contact' will vanish and you lose the possibility to call the other
> nation.

This is also more complex than my proposal.

(Tangentially, I like the idea of army commanders meeting and shaking
hands when their armies are adjacent as rationale for contact, then
exchanging ambassadors (creating embassies), writing treaties, and
exchanging technologies on behalf of their Great Leader. But if nothing of
the sort is done - nothing is agreed upon - the army commanders go their
separate ways and contact is lost the turn after...)

> 4) A permanent status is alliance or peace or one side having an
> embassy.
> (Cease-fire will expires at it's real end or at 'contact' expiration)
> (neutral is not permanent)
> (war isn't permanent but is remembered!)

I don't see why you need this permanent/non-permanent distinction at all.
Just remove the silly idea that "No Contact" is a treaty, and all these
problems go away like fog before the sun.

> 5) During a meeting, if you haven't an embassy you should have limited
> diplomatic options (or better, you should have a limited knowledge of
> other nation status, so there are less reason not to agree to a
> meeting).
> Example:
> * you shouldn't see how much gold has other nation
> * you shouldn't see how many techs you don't know and that they have
> * you shouldn't see any cities of the other nation that you don't know
> etc.

Isn't this way it is now?

> 6) Embassy report should be more insightful (it should resemble the spy
> report of your entire spy network) some possible report we can add:
> * demography number of all nation you have an embassy with
> * the names (thus the number) of every cities of the other nation
> (but not where they are) and which of them is the capital
> * the diplomatic status (treaties with other players)
> * number of units (perhaps detailed?)

Separate issue, separate patch.

> 7) we can give some of the above information only if you reach a certain
> discover (say espionage for the most powerful ones)

Separate issue, separate patch.

  - Per

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