[Freeciv] Civ I, Civ II, Freeciv comparison + one possible Freeciv impro
[Top] [All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
freeciv@xxxxxxxxxxx (Freeciv users)
[Freeciv] Civ I, Civ II, Freeciv comparison + one possible Freeciv improvement (was: Just to start the game : happy end !!!)
Reinier Post <rp@xxxxxxxxxx>
Mon, 4 Jan 1999 19:32:57 +0100
> Given all that's missing from Freeciv (diplomacy and embassies
> being the big ones) I'm not sure that I would call it complete.
You are mistaken. Much of the Civ II diplomacy is still missing, but the
Civ I functionality is mostly there. Game->Players 'Meet' and 'Intelligence'
will work after you've established an embassy using one of your diplomats.
> > I was once addicted to Civ I for a month or two. I dislike Civ II (it
> > has far too much fluff to my taste); I've only played it once.
> That's unfortunate, because Civ2 really is a better game.
True, and Freeciv shares most of its improvements, without all the
silliness. (Music, silly animations, the ugly map display in which
everything disappears in a blur of green and brown spots; I got used to
it, but I didn't like it.) My problems with Civ II are in its
interface. And Freeciv adds more: the Internet, free source code and
active development, much better configurability.
> The AI cheats in more subtle ways, (the Civ1 AI could just declare
> it had Wonders) certain units really do enhance the game -- partisans in
> particular, and there are many more options in world generation.
Freeciv is better in those respects, too, and it will improve further.
> > You an even break in into running games by connecting as an AI player.
> > There should probably be an option to disable this.
> Why? It's cheating, but you can't really affect the AI units. So
> all you're gaining is information.
The main problem is the huge delay when the map is transferred.
For large maps and slow connections, the game can easily be interrupt
d for several minutes. Just a
notify_player(0,"Hang on, map is being transferred to player %s ...",
would at least inform the players what is going on. Also, some humans
may not like to have others spying on their work after they leave a game
prematurely and are turned to AI. (Not something I'd easily admit to doing,
but there we are.)
One idea: a server command to set the range of hosts from which a player
may be connected to. The syntax could be borrowed from xhost.
Reinier Post rp@xxxxxxxxxx