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: "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 00:43:18 +0000 (GMT)

On Sat, 22 Feb 2003, Ross Wetmore wrote:
> I'm happy with the Alpha Centauri model that you (Per) like
> but only if it can't beused for any real advantage.
> I think that any spy capability should have a cost

As I said to Greg, I have no problem with splitting the current embassy
into embassy and spy network. But this is something that (as Chris said)
requires careful thought, and I won't do it this time around.

> So the question really comes down to what can an embassy do,
> and what should that cost?

Why should an embassy have a cost?

Why shouldn't an alliance have a cost? Or shared vision? Surely from a
(misguided) "realism" viewpoint these must be awfully expensive to

The only good argument for a cost is for game balance. But in this sense
it already has a cost. If you allow the other player to establish an
embassy on your soil, you also allow him to spy on you. So there is a
cost, but the burden is shifted to the other player.

(If you trust the other player, there is no cost in this sense, but
neither is there a benefit from spying.)

  - Per

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