[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #15092] Trade route revenue lower than expected

[Joan Creus]

Follow-up Comment #12, bug #15092 (project freeciv):

The bonus for trade routes spanning different empires has always been there,
and for a good reason: if both cities belong to you, each city gets half the
revenue, but the empire gets it twice. So, yes, if you lose a city, the trade
for the remaining city will double (but you will lose all the trade from the
other).

The bonus for different continents has also been there forever, and it
reflects the added difficulty of having to carry the caravan overseas. It
does have an historical analogy: think the Silk Route or the gold trade with
America. Trade with other continents brings more valuable stuff and traders
get richer.

As for the factor of 6 vs. 8, we should really do some simulations and choose
whatever is closer to 2.1. Do you really ever get 5 revenue on the same island
in 2.1, even in large islands? I'm afraid that, as game progresses, and trade
routes span really large distances, we will have absurdly large revenues if
the division factor is too low.

I would start with 8 in beta 3, and perhaps try 6 in beta 4, then take a
final decision before release. This will give my empire a much-needed
economic boost in its war against cheating AIs :-).

___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Gna!
  http://gna.org/


___
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev

Re: [Freeciv-Dev] [bug #15092] Trade route revenue lower than expected

[David Lowe]

On Jan 12, 2010, at 22:30 , pepeto wrote:

> * Do you think it's normal or realistic to divide the trade route  
> value by 2
> if the owner is not the same?  And the trade would increase if you  
> lose a
> city...  Or maybe should it be based on the initial owner?
> * Do you think it's normal or realistic to multiply by 2 he trade  
> route value
> if the continent is not the same?


It certainly makes sense from a 'real world' perspective.  The more  
exotic the goods being traded, the more valuable they will be.  Items  
from another culture are more likely to be seen as exotic than items  
from your own.  Goods from another continent are also likely to made  
from raw ingredients that can't be grown/found on your own continent  
- thus making them more of a novelty.

As to whether trade values should change due to change of ownership,  
that's a tougher nut to crack.  As i understand it, the whole reason  
the formula got changed was to reduce the load on the processor.  If  
so, then we should keep an eye towards not making this calculation  
too expensive or running it too often.

I have one little question: in a 'gen 1' environment, is each little  
island considered its own continent, or is there some way of grouping  
them into archipelagos?

I have one idea that i'd like to toss out there, though i'm afraid  
it may contradict what i wrote above.  The more advanced  
transportation becomes, the more jaded consumers become.  Perhaps we  
can adjust the total land distance some percentage down when  
railroads come along, and a similar adjustment of distance over sea  
based on what generation ships are in effect?

Using a rusty Amiga 4000T, a shiny PowerMac G5, & a homebuilt Ubuntu box

"Nobody goes there any more, it's too crowded." - Yogi Berra

___
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1249] Emirate of Granada

[J.M. Maalderink]

Follow-up Comment #1, patch #1249 (project freeciv):

This nation gave me an idea. Instead of just a civ for the Emirate of Granada
and call it Moors, I thought it would be cool to have a civ for the Moors as a
whole, from 711 to 1492.

I've made a Moorish civ with leaders from the entire period, and with Arab
city names. It took a lot of time to find Arab translations for cities on the
Iberian peninsula, but it was worth it.

I've attached the Moorish ruleset; we could use the flags from the original.
If you don't mind this one could replace the Moorish-Granadian civilization.
Tell me what you think.

(file #7672)
___

Additional Item Attachment:

File name: moor.ruleset   Size:4 KB


___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Gna!
  http://gna.org/


___
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev

[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #15125] Some bugs in the scenario editor

[Jordi Negrevernis i Font]

URL:
  

 Summary: Some bugs in the scenario editor
 Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jorneg
Submitted on: Wednesday 01/13/10 at 23:15
Category: editor
Severity: 3 - Normal
Priority: 5 - Normal
  Status: None
 Assigned to: None
Originator Email: 
 Open/Closed: Open
 Release: 
 Discussion Lock: Any
Operating System: GNU/Linux
 Planned Release: 

___

Details:


I can road an deep ocean, ocean or lake tile!!!

When you select deep ocean, ocean to change the terrain, the editor just sets
a lake tile type!!

In general, the editor does not check that a combination of terrain and
specials are possible, e.g. you can irrigate an swap tile.

This is for S2_2 branch and gnu/linux.






___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Gna!
  http://gna.org/


___
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev

[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1249] Emirate of Granada

[Ann]

Follow-up Comment #2, patch #1249 (project freeciv):

Yours is much more detailed than mine.  It's fine with me if this replaces
it; the flag is more appropriate for this one as well.

___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Gna!
  http://gna.org/


___
Freeciv-dev mailing list
Freeciv-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev