[Freeciv] Re: Some questions

[Nathan Lovell <lovell@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> I've been skimming to lightly to pick up what ICS stands for, but I suspect I
> could guess.  I played on the civserver a couple of times and got thrashed.  I
> haven't been back, because the style of play required to win doesn't 
> correspond
> to my idea of what a "history" game should be.  I prefer a more reflective 
> style
> of play.

Ditto for me.

> I wonder if you could break some canned strategies by adding some 
> randomization
> to things like the cost of researching a given strategy?  For example, let the
> cost in the data file be the statistically expected cost, but let the actual 
> cost
> for a given player fall in a gaussian distribution around that median, to be
> determined when s/he starts building it.  For maximum effect, don't tell the
> player what that cost is -- just have the client keep on displaying the time 
> to
> the *expected* completion, as if that's what the royal advisors are promising.

I think that to a small extent that would be good.  Too much variation
would be bad.  I always thought it was a little odd that you know exactly
how much research it will take to get to a certain point.  One more *big*
variation is to have the tech tree itself vary.  Obiously there are
logical connections between the techs the way the tree is, but there are a
few possibilities:

1- Add more techs 
2- Prevent the techs newly accessible by a development from being
available until after the next research is done (encourage breadth).  This
doesn't actually vary the techs, just makes it a ppear that way.

> Another option would be to give you a discount for exploring the breadth of 
> the
> tech tree, and a surcharge for exploring the depth, so that players who 
> wanted to
> rush out and get that One True Technology would find decreasing returns on 
> their
> investments.
Very realistic.  There's no such thing as "independent" technologies, as
everybody gains a little from advances in any field.  I like that idea!