[Freeciv] Re: Dirigible

[saywhat@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eddie Anderson)]

nicholas.g.lawrence@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>>Eddie
>    >I've seen (at least some of) their posts (and yours).  And I
>>haven't noticed any gaps in the thread so far.  No worries here.
>>:-)
>
>nick
>I think some of the previous discussion suggested
>attack 0
>defence 1?
>
>Was the proposal that the dirigible be mainly for
>1) exploration
>2) troop carrier
>in that order of priority?
>
>I only got the very tail end of that discussion.

    IIRC exploration was proposed first; troop carrying functions
were proposed later.

    I checked the emails I received.  Based on the order of the
emails in my inbox, "kilobug" posted the first response.  In his
response, he proposed A=0, D=1, M=5 (among other things).  "evyscr"
followed up to kilobug's post with a suggestion that movement be
only 4.  Hope that fills in the gaps for you.

    I've been following the discussion and gradually forming some
opinions about it.  The first one is this - I'm starting to think
that a dirigible's movement should be even smaller - perhaps only 2.
Why?  One reason is to make the choice between building a dirigible
and building an explorer more interesting.  I'll explain:

    IMO part of what makes the Civ games so interesting is the
tradeoffs in the things you build.  E.g. once you have the techs,
you can build an Archer or a Chariot for the same price - 30
shields.  Both units have attack values of 3, but each is better
than the other in some way.  Archers are better than Chariots on
defense (2 vs. 1).  But Chariots can move twice as fast as Archers
(2 vs 1 (over some terrain)).  So, when you have the choice between
building a Chariot or an Archer, which type of unit should you
build?

    The answer usually depends on a variety of factors.  But that
choice only exists because there is a tradeoff built into the
Archer's and Chariot's specifications.  If Chariots were 322 instead
of 312, that choice would be gone.  You would (almost) never choose
to built an Archer once you had the tech to build a Chariot.  The
Archer's 321 characteristics would pale in comparison to the
Chariot's 322 (especially when both units cost the same).

    So, if a dirigible unit is going to be added to FreeCiv, then
please make the build choice interesting (between dirigibles and
other units).  On that subject, I have some thoughts about how
(and why) to do that (at least for the choice between dirigible and
explorer).

    An explorer can move 3 (per turn) but can only see 1 square
around him (or her).  A dirigible's big advantage over an explorer
is its (proposed) 2 vision.  If a dirigible could also move 3 (or
more), then there would be little reason to build an explorer once
dirigibles became available.

    Another possible justification for a lower movement rating for
dirigibles is weather.  I assume (and please correct me if I'm
wrong) that dirigibles need reasonably good weather in order to
operate.  If a dirigible can't fly 1 day out of 3 (on average) due
to weather, then reducing the dirigibles FreeCiv movement rating
(e.g. from 3 to 2) might be a way of abstracting that.

    Furthermore, if the prevailing winds (on any given day) oppose
the direction the dirigible needs to go in, then its movement on
that day could be significantly reduced.  Again, a way of
abstracting the effect of varying wind direction on a dirigible's
ability to move is to give a dirigible a reduced movement rating.

    I have one more idea about dirigibles (and I hesitate to suggest
this because of the added code that might be needed to support it) -
If giving dirigibles a low movement allowance is unacceptable, then
another (weather-related) way of making a dirigible less desirable
(compared to an explorer) would be to make dirigibles vulnerable to
random destruction (like a trireme is when it strays from the
coast).

    Finally, on the subject of explorers, does anyone think that
they cost too much?  When I play FreeCiv, I find that I use the
explorer that I get in the beginning of the game in a variety of
ways; but if I lose that explorer in combat, then I usually don't
build another one.

    But I wonder, if explorers only cost 20 to build (instead of
30), would I build one occasionally?  Anyone think the same?  (Note
to myself: modify a copy of the units.rules file and try this in
some games.)

Eddie