[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Freeciv-Dev](PR#9041) worker unit adjustments

["ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=9041 >

On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 08:24:51PM -0700, Mike Jing wrote:
> 
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=9041 >
> 
> Per wrote:
> 
> >I suggest to increase its cost. It now costs 30 and the engineer costs 40.
> >This is IMHO way too cheap, considering that settlers cost 40 _and_ 1
> >population. So the attached patch changes worker cost to 40 and engineer
> >cost to 60. This is still cheap, just a little less so.
> 
> I strongly disagree.  I think the cost is fine as it is.  Making them more 
> expensive would defeat the purpose of having them in the first place, which 
> is to make it easier to build terrain improvements.  Nobody would bother 
> building a worker when you can get a settler and found a new city at the 
> same cost.  

Yes, the worker has to be cheaper in the short and long run than a
settler. And perhaps some military units could get some working
abilities like creating fortifies too. (alpines, pioneers ...)

> IMNSHO, it's the settler that is way too cheap, and raising its 
> cost would help slow down smallpox and make terrain improvements more 
> worthwhile.  

I said the same in the past, adjusting the settlercost the right way is
a good way to break the exponenential growth of ICS.

> Plus, the settler costs 1 population because it can found 
> cities, so the comparison is inappropriate.

Yes, only settlers should cost population.

> I also believe the worker should have no tech requirement, considering that 
> the settler requires none.  There should also be an option to start with a 
> couple of workers in addition to settlers and explorers.

You can't build explorers from start too but you can start with some,
could be the same.

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Strub  ***  eMail ue80@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
jb: people are stupid, they don't want to learn.