[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#13845) Increasing the appeal of very large cities

["Jason Short" <jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

<URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=13845 >

Antoine Bouchard wrote:
> <URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=13845 >
> 
>>From: "Peter Schaefer":
>>Cheap buildings with a high maintenance but a high bonus multiplier
>>would do the trick too - no magic rules needed
> 
> Although smallpoxers usually don't build buildings, having them cheap makes 
> them more easily accessible to them.
> 
> High maintenance makes the largepoxers spend a lot on buildings per turn 
> While smallpoxers will always generate more trade, hence have more money. 
> High maintenance tax the ones who have the less money. High bonus 
> multipliers need to first cancel out the high maintenance cost.
> 
> No matter how I see this smallpox always wins.

That's not really true.  Smallpox may generate more overall trade 
(though in 2.1 I think it doesn't) but it generates much lower trade 
*per city*.  So smallpoxers can't afford to upkeep many buildings.

However just by changing buildings like this we may end up where a mixed 
strategy is clearly best: mostly smallpox with a few well-picked sites 
for large cities.  (This is also the end result of the 
notradesize/fulltradesize settings.)

-jason