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

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: 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: Diplomacy
From: Davide Pagnin <nightmare@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 17 Feb 2003 19:23:12 +0100

On Mon, 2003-02-17 at 15:54, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> On 17 Feb 2003, Davide Pagnin wrote:
> > >- "Contact with X" is redefined as "one of your ground units have
> > > been adjacent to one of player X's ground units this turn".
> >
> > From this, IMHO, it seems that contact duration is FOREVER, not 1
> > turn... Which is exactly opposite of my countdown proposal.
> ??
> Please explain how you go from 1 turn to forever here...

I see. I have misunderstood your words.

I have read your proposal as:
"Contact with X" is redefined as one of your ground units have been
adjacent to one of player X's ground units this turn and then the
contact with X is made and will stay forever.

I should have read, instead:
"Contact with X" is redefined as one of your ground units have been
adjacent to one of player X's ground units this turn and after this turn
this occasion will expire.

Ok, now that it is clear that you proposed a contact that lasts for 1
turn, I say that 1 turn is not enough. Imagine the you make your move at
the end of your turn, and you move forward and back (that is like a unit
that is making a sentry loop). If you discover a new player in that
moment, you will not be able to contact him unless you try to find him

Anyway, the example isn't important, but I think that 1 turn for making
contacts isn't enough, at least I think that this time should be
configurable. (Say 0 for forever, and any number for a fixed amount of
turns, the default can be 20 as in Civ2 or less, if you prefer).

> > >- If you have embassy or contact with a player, you can meet with
> > > him/her (this turn). The possibility of meet through contact is
> > > regulated with a server option, which defaults to on.
> >
> > This is part of my proposal also, but the meeting options without
> > embassy should be limited.
> There we already agree.
> > > - You can give away an embassy to the other player as part of the
> > > diplomatic meeting.
> >
> > I'm against this one, because the sacrifice of a diplomat, or at least
> > some other particular actions, should be needed.
> > one side note, for example, this option should be unavailable if writing
> > hasn't been discovered by one of the sides.
> I agree on requiring Writing, but I think you should reconsider requiring
> a diplomat. What about modpacks that don't have diplomats? I'd certainly
> never introduce something as broken-by-design as a diplomat in my modpack
> if I could avoid it :)

Let me explain better.

What is required for having an embassy?

1) Discover writing
2) Produce a diplomat
(Both point 1 and 2 can be avoided, if someone else do build an embassy
with us and then give us a diplomat)

3) Reach a foreign city with the diplomat without being destroyed
(Implicit into 3 there is the fact that you know where is a foreign
city, at least!)

4) Marco Polo's make it possible to have an embassy without having nor
writing nor a diplomat but its effect is not permanent.

My point is that, anything that is normally needed for having the
embassy, should be part of the meeting exchange.

This means, for example: NO diplomat ---> No embassy

In a modpack where a diplomat isn't present, than it is not needed for
making the embassy (but then we need to develop another way of creating
the embassy, perhaps money?)

So, I can agree to something that is automated (like a meeting
exchange), but that start from the point that everything that is needed
is at hand.

For having the chance of create an embassy by meeting, you need to have
1 diplomat at hand and know at least one city of the target nation.

Another important thing, I think that we should modify the actual setup
and require that you have writing for actually being able of creating an
embassy (this should be required also for Marco Polo's), if you not have
the knowledge, your not able to understand the concept, than you cannot
use it! (give a all the pieces of a nuclear weapon to a monkey and
imagine it is able to build it...)

We can stretch this to a limit (for a compromise) and require money
(instead of a diplomat) for building the embassy (and the knowledge of
writing, of course). The required money should be 30 (diplomat) x 4 =
120 coins. (the buy cost for a unit seems a little bit different and
suggests 30 x 3.5, we can discuss this either as a side effect)
Instead of paying 120, you can sacrifice a diplomat.
If you have a spy. you need to sacrifice a move action.
For the second requirement (the known cities), if no cities are already
known, you need to pick and give the knowledge of that city.

Side note: I strongly support the location of the embassy in the capital
(if a capital exist) and then require that the position of the capital
is known (if the embassy is founded).
(Embassy became again very powerful...)

> > The IR Part of my proposal, should be considered part of it, because by
> > removing the fact that you need an embassy to have a meeting, the
> > importance of an embassy decreases as well, and then in the game
> > balance, the whole mechanics has to be changed, not only one part.
> That is a big job, though, requiring GUI-changes to a whole lot of
> clients. So while I agree with your proposal, I'm not going to implement
> it, and I sure don't want to wait forever for someone to do so.
>   - Per

If we agree on what is needed to be implement, we can ask client
maintainer to help in implement those function, and the whole work will
be accomplished in little time.

        Ciao, Davide

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