Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv: April 2003:
[Freeciv] Re: Technology
Home

[Freeciv] Re: Technology

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: freeciv@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv] Re: Technology
From: Christian Knoke <chrisk@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 13:10:43 +0200

On Sun, Apr 13, 2003 at 01:26:00PM -0700, David Paigen wrote:
> 
> As for moving units, I think the speed of a script would unbalance
> the play too much.  There is no way a human can compete against
> computer speed units.  Other RTS games limit the speed of computer
> units.

Some players already use modified clients which can move faster in some
situations. On the other hand, the moves per turn are limited, so this is
all about *reaction*, not speed. Also, we already have server-controlled
goto and we will get sophisticated auto-attack.

Connected to this is the ping time, which differs from player to player and
can make things really hard for some people.

Maybe it is a good idea to limit the unit speed, so things are more fair.
One idea I had is to give a time slot (lets say 0.5 sec) for any move of any
unit. The client controls how these slots are used. So a destroyer will need
at least 3 seconds to complete its move.

More complex: an additional per-unit time slot of 1 sec (maybe more) for
each MP. So the destroyer will need 6 or even 12 seconds to complete its
move. Time enough for a good player (or robot) to react.

Since this model can give problems for players with a *lot* of units (at war
times), you can make it even more complex: The first mentioned time slot is
reduced (in time) for units in a greater distance, e.g. only 0.2 seconds if
the subsequently moved units have a distance of more than 16 tiles.

Goto and auto-attack are handled in a way that they don't conflict (low
priority, fill in the gaps). This includes that an auto-attack can fail when
there is no free time slot.

Christian

-- 
Christian Knoke     * * *      http://www.enter.de/~c.knoke/
* * * * * * * * *  Ceterum censeo Microsoft esse dividendum.


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