Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: December 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7021) fighting ICS (was: allies give all their tec
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7021) fighting ICS (was: allies give all their tec

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: vanevery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7021) fighting ICS (was: allies give all their techs for nothing)
From: "Arnstein Lindgard" <a-l@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 17:01:20 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7021 >

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:23:45 -0800 Brandon J. Van Every wrote:

> Ok, but then it's totally irrational to allow settlers of size 10K to
> increase the population of cities from 10K to 30K, 30K to 60K, etc. 
> Also it is equally irrational to reduce a city from 100K to 60K and
> only get 10K worth of settlers from the deal.  So I think you have to
> acknowledge that the rules are linear *in practice*, regardless of
> what they're supposed to represent in theory.

I guess I have to.

> Ok, to make a Rifleman division, you have to empty out 20K men.  And,
> unless your culture is rather modern, that's 20K *men*.  It should
> affect your fertility rates, although not as bad as you might think
> because 1 man can service a lot of women if need be.  :-)

Sure, but if you have a really modern army, the servicemen and
servivewomen can service each other in the proper moral monogamous
fashion. Hey wait a minute, when did this discussion depart from
the KISS principle?

> On that note, it should be remembered that Civ has all sorts of
> irrational things in it.

Yeah we all rationalize in whatever way we need to achieve our goal.
Right, the goal was fighting smallpox. At some point we have to just
look away from one unrealistic aspect or another. As long as the
final game mode becomes balanced and competetively playable.


Arnstein




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