Re: Dirigible
[email protected] (Eddie Anderson)
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.freeciv.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
nicholas.g.lawrence-q/[email protected] 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