Re: [Freeciv-Dev] map contribution question

Hi!

Pille, thx for your opinion. I have some comments to it:


> Think its no problem to add maps to ~/freeciv/data/screnario/ on
> pubserver. Ask nouja and i think he will add them.

Thx, i'll do this.

> > As i see to keep it fair, we'd need some rules. They would work well
> > only after a working client authorization, w/o that we have to
assume
> > fair play. If there's no such mechanism atm, i'd suggest something
like
> > this:
> 
> When some players can have more than other players the mechanism can't
> be fair.

U mean using multiple nicknames? If u do, i agree. Client authorization
would be very nice, we cannot guarantee fair circumstanes w/o that. Not
only in connection w/ maps, but in any terms. under "fair" now i mean
fair in the rankings.


> That is usual for scenario maps.
> Only we don't have predifined positions for teams ...

I think starting positions are absolutely vital in duels. W/o being able
to set the starting pos, islands have to be very 'homogenous' (or u can
say  boring) to keep the choices of the player close. 


> I can remember something like that was in quakeworld.=20
> "map dm4" or short "dm4" and you changed to that map. Also cycling was
> usual.

yes. In quake 3 there's a vote mechanism to change things like that. Any
player can propose a vote for map changing, if the majoity votes yes
then the server changes the map to the desired ones. I think it's a
perfect solution for this, if we  could implement it it would be great.


> Yes you are righti that that wouldn't be fair. But i think the maps=20
> should be open for all. Good scenarios aren't good because people
don't
> know much about them. They are good because different strategies are
> possible.

i partially agree. I don't know scenario maps much, so i should examine
them deeper. I agree that it's possible to create maps which r fun even
if u know where's the opponent, but i think loosing the role of
eploration affects the gameplay in a negative way. Eg think of the
expansion islands that cannot be seen w/ explorers, or exactly 3 tiles
away, so after moving 1 w/ trireme away from coastal, u have to risk a
sank if u dunno the sland. If u knopw that is there, u simply build a
city there. I think if recording 'who played on this map' takes too much
resource, we could do this: we could have an 'initial' time for any new
map, when we should see who played/watched them./ We should keep this
for 2-3 weeks, so who wanna play on that w/o knowing the map, can do.
After this period map should became open. I dunno exactly now if all the
played gamees on pubserver r recorded and keeped, or the records r
deleted after some time.


> I don't think that its possible to get good to player unknown maps
with
> your system.
> After some time some player have somewhere on their computers the maps
> from the old games. And new players not.

Well if sombody really wanna cheats, i doubt u can stop him. But again,
a  working client authorization would solve 80-90 percent of the
preobklems regarding to this type of cheats i think. That would be a
great step (together w/ modifying the ranking to have it handle
alliances eg) towards getting freeplay back again.

> 
> To get fair unknown maps we have to make the mapgenerator better. But
to
> do that, we have to write down how a fair map has to look like.
> 

Sure, that is a very important way too. I think maybe if more people
would start to design maps, more  would understand and maybe be able to
explain why a map is fair or not. And there r some 'finess' things,
which i think would be very very hard to code. Eg proper layout of inner
lakes (their shape, distance from coastal, and specials artound them).

Overall I think then i'll work a bit on this, and upload it, maybe it
worths a try, then the community will decide :)

bye, hirisov