Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39690) Remove embassy concept
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39690 > On 9/11/07, Christian Prochaska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm in favor of branching from r13566 nevertheless. If it turns out that > nobody wants to backport any patches to that branch anymore, we could > still make an unofficial release from it for people who want to have an > editor for a Freeciv with the game concepts of 2.1. Ok. Feel free. - Per ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39698) 'classic' terrain for 2.1.99
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39698 > On 9/11/07, William Allen Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39698 > > > It may be possible to use the trunk (2.1.99) editor for 2.1, but it's not > practical. The 2.1 files are two years older and incompatible. Sadly, > some "powers that be" decided not to include the editor in 2.1. > So is it impossible to create a ruleset for 2.1.99 that defines only one ocean type? ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39690) Remove embassy concept
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39690 > > [per - Di 11. Sep 2007, 15:25:05]: > > On 9/11/07, Christian Prochaska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > How about creating the S2_2 branch before committing this patch and > > possible others that change gameplay concepts even more? As I remember > > from the discussion about Civworld for 2.1 some months ago, 2.2 was > > supposed to be like 2.1, but with the editor, wasn't it? > > I do not think we have the manpower to maintain a S2_2 branch in > addition to the still unfinished work on S2_1. The map/scenario editor > may be heavily impacted by such changes, and backporting may require > considerable rewriting. > >- Per > I'm in favor of branching from r13566 nevertheless. If it turns out that nobody wants to backport any patches to that branch anymore, we could still make an unofficial release from it for people who want to have an editor for a Freeciv with the game concepts of 2.1. ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#7294) Proposal: Reducing the bribe-power of Diplomats
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7294 > On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Per I. Mathisen wrote: > Tech stealing, city incitement, city poisoning, and city spying. All these > go the way of the Dodo in my suggestion. I forgot to mention unit sabotage and city sabotage. - Per Carpe noctem ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39700) Diplomacy patch: AI should not ask for help against enemies we have not yet met
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39700 >
See lengthy $SUBJECT. Patch attached.
- Per
Carpe noctem
Index: ai/advdiplomacy.c
===
--- ai/advdiplomacy.c (revision 13566)
+++ ai/advdiplomacy.c (working copy)
@@ -1182,7 +1161,8 @@
players_iterate(ally) {
if (!pplayers_allied(pplayer, ally)
|| !ally->is_alive
-|| ally == target) {
+|| ally == target
+|| NEVER_MET(pplayer, ally)) {
continue;
}
___
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39699) Diplomacy patch: Remove duplicate cease-fire message
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39699 >
Patch without the noise.
- Per
Index: ai/advdiplomacy.c
===
--- ai/advdiplomacy.c (revision 13566)
+++ ai/advdiplomacy.c (working copy)
@@ -804,10 +786,14 @@
struct player *aplayer)
{
if (pplayer->ai.control && !ai_handicap(pplayer, H_AWAY)) {
+struct ai_data *ai = ai_data_get(pplayer);
+struct ai_dip_intel *adip =
&ai->diplomacy.player_intel[player_index(aplayer)];
+
notify(aplayer, _("*%s (AI)* Greetings %s! May we suggest a ceasefire "
"while we get to know each other better?"),
pplayer->name, aplayer->name);
ai_diplomacy_suggest(pplayer, aplayer, CLAUSE_CEASEFIRE, 0);
+adip->asked_about_ceasefire = 6; /* anti-spam measure */
}
}
___
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39699) Diplomacy patch: Remove duplicate cease-fire message
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39699 >
When meeting for the first time, the AI gives you two, different messages
to offer you a cease-fire. This patch fixes the issue.
- Per
Index: ai/advdiplomacy.c
===
--- ai/advdiplomacy.c (revision 13566)
+++ ai/advdiplomacy.c (working copy)
@@ -459,24 +459,6 @@
}
break;
- case CLAUSE_EMBASSY:
-if (give) {
- if (ds_after == DS_ALLIANCE) {
-worth = 0;
- } else if (ds_after == DS_PEACE) {
-worth = -5 * game.info.turn;
- } else {
-worth = MIN(-50 * game.info.turn
-+ pplayer->ai.love[player_index(aplayer)],
--5 * game.info.turn);
- }
-} else {
- worth = 0; /* We don't need no stinkin' embassy, do we? */
-}
-DIPLO_LOG(LOG_DIPL, pplayer, aplayer, "embassy clause worth %d",
- worth);
-break;
-
case CLAUSE_LAST:
break;
} /* end of switch */
@@ -804,10 +786,14 @@
struct player *aplayer)
{
if (pplayer->ai.control && !ai_handicap(pplayer, H_AWAY)) {
+struct ai_data *ai = ai_data_get(pplayer);
+struct ai_dip_intel *adip =
&ai->diplomacy.player_intel[player_index(aplayer)];
+
notify(aplayer, _("*%s (AI)* Greetings %s! May we suggest a ceasefire "
"while we get to know each other better?"),
pplayer->name, aplayer->name);
ai_diplomacy_suggest(pplayer, aplayer, CLAUSE_CEASEFIRE, 0);
+adip->asked_about_ceasefire = 6; /* anti-spam measure */
}
}
@@ -1052,13 +1038,6 @@
ai_diplomacy_suggest(aplayer, pplayer, CLAUSE_VISION, 0);
}
- if (!player_has_embassy(pplayer, aplayer)) {
-ai_diplomacy_suggest(aplayer, pplayer, CLAUSE_EMBASSY, 0);
- }
- if (!player_has_embassy(aplayer, pplayer)) {
-ai_diplomacy_suggest(pplayer, aplayer, CLAUSE_EMBASSY, 0);
- }
-
if (!ai_handicap(pplayer, H_DIPLOMACY) || !aplayer->ai.control) {
suggest_tech_exchange(pplayer, aplayer);
}
___
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39690) Remove embassy concept
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39690 > On 9/11/07, Christian Prochaska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How about creating the S2_2 branch before committing this patch and > possible others that change gameplay concepts even more? As I remember > from the discussion about Civworld for 2.1 some months ago, 2.2 was > supposed to be like 2.1, but with the editor, wasn't it? I do not think we have the manpower to maintain a S2_2 branch in addition to the still unfinished work on S2_1. The map/scenario editor may be heavily impacted by such changes, and backporting may require considerable rewriting. - Per ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39690) Remove embassy concept
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39690 > > [per - Mo 10. Sep 2007, 16:30:58]: > > On Sat, 8 Sep 2007, Per I. Mathisen wrote: > > This experimental and mostly untested patch removes the embassy concept > > from the game. > > I am surprised by the lack of comments on this ticket. If subsequent > testing does not reveal any problems, and none objects within 24 hours, I > will commit it. > >- Per > How about creating the S2_2 branch before committing this patch and possible others that change gameplay concepts even more? As I remember from the discussion about Civworld for 2.1 some months ago, 2.2 was supposed to be like 2.1, but with the editor, wasn't it? ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39698) 'classic' terrain for 2.1.99
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39698 > It may be possible to use the trunk (2.1.99) editor for 2.1, but it's not practical. The 2.1 files are two years older and incompatible. Sadly, some "powers that be" decided not to include the editor in 2.1. ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Freeciv web client
I think that I should write some documentation about how to setup and run
the web client, because currently that takes a lot of effort. Each
web-browser session gets its own civclient process. The civclient
process is launched from the Java application server (Resin), and at the
moment the civclient can only be run from the command line for debugging
purposes if it is invoked with correct parameters. So you really have to
setup the application server correctly first, before you can get the whole
thing running.
The data directory was left out because I don't have any more storage
space on the server. I would be really great if a new branch could be
created in SVN on gna.org for this "experiment". Otherwise it would be
difficult to share the source code.
Anyway, it's great that you gave it a try, event though there is still
quite a long way to go.
- Andreas
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Christian Prochaska wrote:
> Unfortunately the data directory is missing from the Freeciv snapshot
> in your archive and with a copy from trunk revision {2007-08-18} (date
> from api_gen.h) the client prints
>
> 2: Client does not support overhead view tilesets.
> 2: Using default tileset instead.
>
> and then crashes:
>
> (gdb) bt full
> #0 0xb7bf267b in strlen () from /lib/libc.so.6
> No symbol table info available.
> #1 0x08087b8c in real_mystrdup (str=0xf423f ,
>called_as=0x80f8631 "strdup", line=101, file=0x8110e58 "sprite.c")
>at mem.c:139
> No locals.
> #2 0x080f5fe6 in crop_sprite (source=0x81e78c0, x=0, y=240, width=96,
>height=48, mask=0x0, mask_offset_x=-1, mask_offset_y=-1) at sprite.c:101
>sprite = (struct sprite *) 0x81e88d0
> #3 0x08077bfe in load_sprite (t=,
>tag_name=0xbfe98268 "city.size_0") at tilespec.c:1426
>sf_w = 99
>sf_h = 99
>__PRETTY_FUNCTION__ = "load_sprite"
> #4 0x0808145d in tileset_load_tiles (t=0x81ce018) at tilespec.c:1933
>dir_name =
> #5 0x080f58ed in ui_main (argc=1, argv=0xbfe98844) at gui_main.c:82
>err =
>t1 = 4278845440
>auto_start_server =
>i =
> #6 0x0804ffa4 in main (argc=Cannot access memory at address 0x3
> ) at civclient.c:357
>i = 1
>loglevel = 2
>ui_options =
>ui_separator = 233
>option =
>user_tileset = 191
> (gdb)
>
___
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] speaking about removing some complexity in the game...
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Daniel Markstedt wrote: > * Streamline the tech tree! I'm looking at the Civ1 version and it's > gorgeous - so easy on the eyes compared to the tangled mess that is > the Civ2/default one. Less techs means quicker advancement and > speedier game. Some parts are obviously redundant, like the > Polytheism-Monotheism-Theology branch that seems quite detached from > the rest. I'd also like to cut down on some of the incrementally > improved unit types, like Catapult-Cannon-Artillery-Howitzer (in > Korean there's not even a clear linguistic distinction between Cannon > and Artillery!) It could use a clean up. But you should see Warzone2100's tech tree ;) > * Don't slow down game time! One game turn varying between 50 and 1 > years depending on how long you've been playing is IMHO > counter-intuitive. Instead, we could for example start in 1000 BC and > then keeping each turn at a constant 10 years. Then it'd take you 300 > turns to get to the year 2000, getting you to the modern era within a > reasonable time frame. Sounds good. > * Put a stricter soft cap of the number of cities! This one is really hard. A start would be to make cities easier to manage. The city screen has way too many options and tabs. And if capitalization didn't suck so much, it might be a nice alternative to limiting the number of cities; they would be there, just would not do much. > Oh, and another pet peeve of mine is that Bridge Building is required > to build roads on river squares. This is just not user-friendly and > probably leaves beginners clueless to why the R button doesn't work > sometimes. I agree. - Per Carpe noctem ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#7294) Proposal: Reducing the bribe-power of Diplomats
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7294 > On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Daniel Markstedt wrote: > Interesting idea. This would certainly improve a complex and bug-prone > part of the game. :) > But with the him losing all his 'peaceful' functions, would the label > "diplomat" really be appropriate anymore? He'd be more like a one-man > tactical nuke. Ok, "Spy", then. > Oh, and BTW, who would do all that good ol' stealing of techs? Maybe > that could be the sole purpose of the spy instead... Tech stealing, city incitement, city poisoning, and city spying. All these go the way of the Dodo in my suggestion. All have and/or have had huge problems: Tech stealing - hard to balance; foul concept was unintuitive City incitement - hard to balance; cost was always too high or too low City poisoning - I bet you didn't remember that one until I mentioned it City spying - another popup; riddled with bugs for as long as I can remember In any case, I never liked how you would steal techs from other players with *units*. IIRC, I think civ4 had a better system, and we can make a similar system with lua scripts later. - Per Carpe noctem ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Freeciv web client
Unfortunately the data directory is missing from the Freeciv snapshot
in your archive and with a copy from trunk revision {2007-08-18} (date
from api_gen.h) the client prints
2: Client does not support overhead view tilesets.
2: Using default tileset instead.
and then crashes:
(gdb) bt full
#0 0xb7bf267b in strlen () from /lib/libc.so.6
No symbol table info available.
#1 0x08087b8c in real_mystrdup (str=0xf423f ,
called_as=0x80f8631 "strdup", line=101, file=0x8110e58 "sprite.c")
at mem.c:139
No locals.
#2 0x080f5fe6 in crop_sprite (source=0x81e78c0, x=0, y=240, width=96,
height=48, mask=0x0, mask_offset_x=-1, mask_offset_y=-1) at sprite.c:101
sprite = (struct sprite *) 0x81e88d0
#3 0x08077bfe in load_sprite (t=,
tag_name=0xbfe98268 "city.size_0") at tilespec.c:1426
sf_w = 99
sf_h = 99
__PRETTY_FUNCTION__ = "load_sprite"
#4 0x0808145d in tileset_load_tiles (t=0x81ce018) at tilespec.c:1933
dir_name =
#5 0x080f58ed in ui_main (argc=1, argv=0xbfe98844) at gui_main.c:82
err =
t1 = 4278845440
auto_start_server =
i =
#6 0x0804ffa4 in main (argc=Cannot access memory at address 0x3
) at civclient.c:357
i = 1
loglevel = 2
ui_options =
ui_separator = 233
option =
user_tileset = 191
(gdb)
___
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39698) 'classic' terrain for 2.1.99
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39698 > > [dmarks - Mo 10. Sep 2007, 23:22:15]: > > The latest error message (with attached files) I'm getting is: > > 1: Missing errno mapping for Winsock error #10093. Please report this > message at http://bugs.freeciv.org/. > > (This is on Windows XP) > This error is caused by my_shutdown_network() being called too early at client exit. Patch exists in PR#39692. ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] speaking about removing some complexity in the game...
Inspired by Per's recent crusade against some of the (arguably) unnecessary complexity in the game, I thought I'd give it a go too. What these suggestions all have in common is that their goal is to speed up the game, especially in the middle to late parts of the game. * Streamline the tech tree! I'm looking at the Civ1 version and it's gorgeous - so easy on the eyes compared to the tangled mess that is the Civ2/default one. Less techs means quicker advancement and speedier game. Some parts are obviously redundant, like the Polytheism-Monotheism-Theology branch that seems quite detached from the rest. I'd also like to cut down on some of the incrementally improved unit types, like Catapult-Cannon-Artillery-Howitzer (in Korean there's not even a clear linguistic distinction between Cannon and Artillery!) * Don't slow down game time! One game turn varying between 50 and 1 years depending on how long you've been playing is IMHO counter-intuitive. Instead, we could for example start in 1000 BC and then keeping each turn at a constant 10 years. Then it'd take you 300 turns to get to the year 2000, getting you to the modern era within a reasonable time frame. * Put a stricter soft cap of the number of cities! The main reason the late game becomes unbearable is because there are too many different things to build in too many cities with too many units to move around. So if there are less cities, there are less chores to do which lets you focus on winning the game instead! The tricky (and controversial) question is: how? Simple: if you grow too big and fat, you fall apart = civil war. All unhappiness is cumulative and builds towards civil war. To keep this process transparent, I suggest having a little icon in the vein of "global warming" and "nuclear winter" which when hovered over shows something like: Shows the progress of civil war: Civil unrest rate: x% Chance of civil war each turn: x% Alternatively, it could be a meter that fills up until it reaches 100% and civil war breaks out. This would make the event more predictable. Interestingly enough for gameplay, this mechanic would ensure the appearance of 'colonial' nations, famous examples being USA or Canada that was formed from British overseas territories. Then, as soon as initial fighting has ceased, 'colonial' nations should become friendly towards their 'mother' nations and potentially close allies. So even if your colonial empire is dissolved, you'll still have an edge in world politics. Maybe a fraction of former colonies' score could count towards your own final score, too? Oh, and another pet peeve of mine is that Bridge Building is required to build roads on river squares. This is just not user-friendly and probably leaves beginners clueless to why the R button doesn't work sometimes. ~Daniel, out ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#7294) Proposal: Reducing the bribe-power of Diplomats
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7294 > On 9/9/07, Per I. Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7294 > > > I would like to resurrect this old but open and valuable ticket. Instead > of the rules changes proposed in it, I would like to offer something a > bit more radical: > > The diplomat/spy instead of present abilities gets the unique flag (only > one can be built per player), it destroys itself automatically when > doing a mission, and gets the ability to take over any enemy unit > stacked alone in the open (with no gold cost), or, if targeting a city, > to destroy all defensive buildings in a city. > > This makes the unit powerful, able to turn the tables on a defensive > hardpoint, but limited (in number and loss effect), while getting rid of > the evil pop-up menu and simplifying the diplomat game logic. > > - Per > Interesting idea. This would certainly improve a complex and bug-prone part of the game. But with the him losing all his 'peaceful' functions, would the label "diplomat" really be appropriate anymore? He'd be more like a one-man tactical nuke. How about, say, "assassin" instead? =) Oh, and BTW, who would do all that good ol' stealing of techs? Maybe that could be the sole purpose of the spy instead... ~Daniel ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39690) Remove embassy concept
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39690 > On 9/11/07, Daniel Doran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39690 > > > > This transaction appears to have no content > > > I've always liked being able to use the information supplied by Embassies > established with AI players when playing a stand-alone game. However, I > have always thought it odd that the only purpose embassies served in the Civ > style games that I've played is to spy on other countries. > > You can make treaties without an embassy, but cannot tell what some other > player (AI or otherwise) is researching without one. > > If you plan on removing the embassies, but leave some way for the > information on other civilizations to appear in the reports, I'm all for it. > > I agree. The intelligence report has to be available as soon as you establish contact then. Which makes me think that contact comes too cheaply really. Maybe it would be required to send a peaceful unit to visit the other player's capital or something like that. But then again, that would be quite annoying in the long run... ~Daniel ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
Re: [Freeciv-Dev] (PR#39690) Remove embassy concept
http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39690 > This transaction appears to have no content I've always liked being able to use the information supplied by Embassies established with AI players when playing a stand-alone game. However, I have always thought it odd that the only purpose embassies served in the Civ style games that I've played is to spy on other countries. You can make treaties without an embassy, but cannot tell what some other player (AI or otherwise) is researching without one. If you plan on removing the embassies, but leave some way for the information on other civilizations to appear in the reports, I'm all for it. Per I. Mathisen wrote: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=39690 > On Sat, 8 Sep 2007, Per I. Mathisen wrote: This experimental and mostly untested patch removes the embassy concept from the game. I am surprised by the lack of comments on this ticket. If subsequent testing does not reveal any problems, and none objects within 24 hours, I will commit it. - Per ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
