[Freeciv] Re: Advanced barbarians / neutral cities

["Masheikh" <Masheikh@xxxxxx>]

>If you are going to make the barbarians realistic, the first thing to
>remember is that in the real world, barbarians were not a single monolithic
>tribe.  Realistic barbarians will fight among themselves if there is no one
>else to attack.  Also, in the real world, there were two major barbarian
>uprisings that conquered most of the known world: Alexander the Great's
>armies, and Ghengis Khan's hordes.  Both of them appeared out of nowhere and
>over the course of a decade or two proceeded to sweep over enormous areas
>defeating everyone in their way, stopping only with the death of their
>leaders.
>
>Mark

        I agree with you in the point that the hords of Ghengis Khan can be 
called barbarians as well as the Hunns under Atilla but u   can't call the 
greek under Alexander the great, although HE was an Makkodonian, barbarians.

        A problem is that if you give them more power, maybe more units or 
cities you make them more and more equal to normal ai-       nations. I think 
barbarians shoul be a disaster that maybe every 500years comes over u in a 
greater number than 2 or three      units. Maybe every 500years up to 20 units 
should enter the world to attack and destroy everythink. This includes that  
conquered cities are burned to the ground. barbarians should be an short but 
hard disaster, not abel to conquer an empire but   destroy it.

>- automatically give them settlers from time to time
>- make BIG chance that city in disorder convert to barbarian
>- give barbarian special government
>- give barbarians techs depending on world's techs
>- set happiness level for the whole empire :
>  happiness = (happy_pop - 2*unhappy_pop - cities) / pop * gov_modifier
>- make units w/o upkeep automaticaly convert to barbarians
>- make change for cities to change to barbarians depending on :
>  distance_to_your_capital / happiness
>- make BIG chance that city that it revolting because of diplomat doesn't 
>convert

        barbarians should not become an equal nation, barbarians didn't use to 
have cities thats why they are barbarians. they  plundered the land as long as 
they could and moved to conquere the next after that. the hunns as well as the 
mongols where      NOMADIC wartribes on horses, not with legions ;-)

>- disallow disbanding, you may still free unit, but it will convert to
>  barbarian
>- make BIG chance that unit damaged after battle convert to barbarians
>- make chance for units to change to barbarians depending on :
>  ( distance_to_your_capital + distance_to_your_nearest_city ) / happiness

        yes - as well as barbarias represent anarchy in all forms maybe this 
could also include the uprising of units. remember the     history of cartago 
who had to fight their own army after the first war against rom, because they 
wanted to disband them.

>> on the one hand it is very hard to manage such a system but on the other
>> hand as far as freeciv uses to be a picture of the real world religion is
>> needed indeed.
>
>       I'm not sure this sentence makes any sense at all.  Are there words
>misspelled/missing from this?

        i just wanted to express that religion is important, if freeciv wants 
to be an "real-life-history-simulation" because religion is part  of the 
real-life-history and present as well and so religion should be implemented in 
any way but i think it will be hard to find       this way.

i hope u get me
cya Masheikh