[Freeciv-Dev] tech cost (uh-oh)
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
Oops! I knew I should have put this into attention as soon as the new tech
cost system was proposed. My fault.
I notice that, by default, the new "depends on tree depth" technology
cost, and that the old
"depends on number of techs already discovered" is off.
I would suggest to make the old method the default one.
Rationale 1: from a background point of view, the old method allow for just
a little hint of civilization specialization, something which unfortunately
is on a very short supply in FreeCiv. Like:
"See? We developed into a war oriented civilization, and now we can develop
<insert war tech here> much more easily than others, but <insert peaceful
tech here> does not really come intuitive to us!"
It was not much of a civilization specialization, but better than nothing.
It is also nice as a concept: nothing is difficult or easy per-se, rather
all that comes natural to you is easy for you, and the other way round.
Rationale 2: from a game point of view, the old method makes one's playing
style matter more. With the old method, the choice of what to discover first
and what later will affect much more heavily the times when each technology
will be made available. Also, technology differences, even between equally
tech-advanced players, tend to get enhanced (instead, with the new method:
"no matter what you do, <insert hi-tech here> will equally cost a lot, and
<insert low tech here> will always be at hand"). Summary: old method = more
interesting games.
It is all a matter of shades, of course. With either method more advanced
technologies will cost more and will appear later. Only, the old method
seems a better "shade" to me. Also, it is very good that it is an option
anyway. Ahhh that good FreeCiv style, I just love it! :)
[Before you go "change your own settings, leave the rest of us alone"
consider that discussing which way is best, and should therefore be the
default one, makes perfect sense, for a number of reasons I will not discuss
here.]
Let me know what you think.
Marco
|
|