[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#12968) Barbarians rethought

["Peter Schaefer" <peter.schaefer@xxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=12968 >

> - nuclear detonation: 30 points

Well, I wasn't aware that freeciv was an unhappiness simulation ;-)
But if it doesn't use many CPU cycles ;-)

Because this really should cause unhappiness, not barbarians.
So you would have cities rebelling. The barbarians idea suffers from
where these barbarians would be coming from, if everything has been
settled. And they should have technology that was a threat. And why
have them, if they are dumb. Rebels have to be smart to win ..

On 5/3/05, Per I. Mathisen <per@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> <URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=12968 >

> 3) Getting game benefits that are not the result of your own actions is
>    generally bad, IMHO.

Well, the board game Civilization had this, getting rebelling cities
join the weakest, and it was ok(Re: "balancing a 4X game"), although a
bit strange. I guess you'd really want something like "infiltration"
or "propaganda" which would lead to higher unrest in an empire, and
would require an investment. A "transfer unit(s) to rebel" command
would also be cool to lead proxy wars, but you'd have to be able to
assess the rebels friendliess towards the enemy and your civilization
too.