[Freeciv] Re: How to solve ICS

[Jussi Asp <Jussi.Asp@xxxxxx>]

Thomas Strub wrote:

>On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 04:55:12PM +0300, Jussi Asp wrote:
>  
>
>>IMO biggest problem with smallpox has been the freecitycenterworker and 
>>too expensive improments.
>>If there is enough resources and space around I think building new 
>>cities should still be smart. Preventing expansion
>>with limiting the amount of cities you can have ( like jings 
>>unhappiness-patch) or making every new city more
>>costly surely works, but  I don't think its very elegant..
>>
>>..so here are the rules I propose: (which surely are very elegant =P )
>>    
>>
>[...]
>  
>
>>I've played some games with these settings and also used 4 settlers at 
>>start to get it going faster and
>>IMHO it works quite well against smallpoxing and in favor of developed 
>>cities and is still fun to play.
>>    
>>
>
>Did you play a smallpoxtactic against a nonsmallpoxtactic? Which was
>better in the long run? (Faster steam, faster some wonders)
>
>I think even with 60 shields a smallpoxtactic is better.
>
>For a new city you need 50 Food and 60 shields.
>And you get in a normal city (with rep) 
>3 Food 1 shield 2 trade
>2 Food 1 shield 2 trade
>
>With a little bit rapturing you could remove the drawback of the loss of 2
>population. So you have to change the rapture delay ...
>
>With smallpox you get after < 30 rounds your investment back. Think
>usually a little bit faster. Particularly with cheap improvement units.
>Then you have usually 1 food more.
>
>I think an ICS strategy will be effective with you rulesets.
>
>Do you have tiles for the "Worker"? It has to be added in my
>rulesetchange too :-)
>
>Thomas
>
>  
>
Actually I think the current rules aren't that bad so small changes are 
good IMO.And those changes to rules were already a lot to favor 
nonsmallpox-strategy, and sure the variables can be changed even moreif 
need be, though I think the balance with my propose i good. I've used 
the settler and engineer tiles for workers.

-Jussi Asp