[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#12833) consider_settler_action simplification

["Brian Dunstan" <bdunstan149@xxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=12833 >


--- Jason Short <jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> <URL:
> http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=12833
> >
> 
> Brian Dunstan wrote:
> 
> >>Actually, that's wrong.  You can't just amortize
> the
> >>difference in tile
> >>value, because that difference is not a one time
> >>payment.  
> > 
> > Are you sure?  The value, according to
> > evaluate_improvements(),  is the difference,
> before
> > and after, of city_tile_value().  In a republic
> > government, a square that is plains with road an
> > irrigation has a city_tile_value() of 93,
> according to
> > current weightings.  The question is, 93 of what? 
> > What are the units being used?  If the units are
> gold
> > pieces equivalent, the 93 looks like that is the
> value
> > of the perpetuity in lump sum today.
> 
> If you read the text of the other ticket you'll see
> the current code is
> (IIRC) buggy in this regard.
> 
> The actual math for calculating the payoff in
> current-day value of a
> payment in perpetuity is pretty simple (simply the
> inverse of the
> interest rate, as you say).  But it's made more
> complex by all the
> complicated rigaramole that's added on (like the 4x
> factor for inuse tiles).

Right.  I think that 4x factor can be dropped.  If
there is a preference for tiles already worked, then
there will be many tiles that are not useful before
improvement, but very useful after.  So the city will
not work these tiles until they are improved, but the
worker will not improve them until they are worked (or
at least, it may end up trekking to the other side of
the map to do something else before making the
improvement)


-Brian


                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!
http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide