Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: September 2005:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#13845) Increasing the appeal of very large cities
Home

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

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: osyluth@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#13845) Increasing the appeal of very large cities
From: "Vasco Alexandre da Silva Costa" <vasc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 13:50:26 -0700
Reply-to: bugs@xxxxxxxxxxx

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

On Mon, 5 Sep 2005, Benoit Hudson wrote:

> <URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=13845 >
>
> What about the MOO2 model of population growth? As a reminder: population is
> tracked seperately; the growth rate is a simple population model if the food
> production is sufficient, and is sharply reduced (often negative) if the
> food is insufficient.

Handling food freighters in MOO2 was boring beyond belief. The way MOM did
it was so much better.

> In a game without food transport, that meant that small colonies were
> worthless: they couldn't do anything but feed themselves, and had no excess
> capacity -- indeed, they basically were just things to spend resources on
> defending, and defense was almost impossible. This mitigates S2.
>
> Also, the simple population model was basically a sigmoid: with higher
> population, you get more population growth (exponentially more in parts of
> the curve), until you start to reach the holding capacity of the planet.
> This mitigates S1.
>
> Notice I say "mitigates" -- what it means is that you end up with more of a
> mixed strategy, one that depends a bit more on your local circumstances. A
> game where largepox always dominates is equally uninteresting as one where
> smallpox always dominates.

---
Vasco Alexandre da Silva Costa @ Instituto Superior Tecnico, Lisboa







[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]