<URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=37592 >
On 3/7/07, Per I. Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <URL: http://bugs.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=37592 >
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, (Eddie_Anderson) wrote:
> > Since this discussion last summer, I've been thinking some more
> > about what Freeciv could be. I've reached a few tentative
> > conclusions. Some of the changes are simple; some are far-reaching.
> Thanks for opening up this topic again. I will soon have more time to look
> at such ideas.
> > 1) Add a new victory condition to Freeciv that is based on points.
> > I propose that a fourth victory condition be added to Freeciv:
> > d) The first player to X points wins.
> > One of the biggest advantages of this is that it makes
> > Freeciv games scalable. E.g. if you want a short game, play to
> > 500 points; if you want a longer game, play 2000 points; etc.
> I have been thinking along these lines myself, inspired a great deal by
> the way the board game Settlers of Catan manages the victory condition.
> However, I think the number of points should be very low, preferably 10 by
> default, to make the number seem more meaningful and close, and it should
> in most cases be possible to steal points from opponents to create
> counter-strategies (just like in Settlers of Catan).
I'm for 'Settlers' style victory points, as I remember loving the
VP-snatching dynamic of that game. Even when a game seemed settled, a
skilled player could always come out of the blue with a deviously
devised master plan and grab the victory. This is a dynamic that is
sorely missing from Freeciv, making most games overly predictable.
Another game I think has a good victory conditions system is Steve
Jackson Games' card game Illuminati: Before the game starts, each
player is assigned an individual victory condition that is kept secret
from the other players. In this game, a successful tactic involves
discreetly striving for your victory condition not to give away what
it is to your fellow players. Just like in Settlers, it is very
possible to effectively counter a player's moves, which gives an
unusual tension to a game of Illuminati.
To translate this into Freeciv gameplay, you select a secret 'trait'
for yourself during pregame that modify how VPs are accumulated; e.g.:
* Expansionist: x2 VP from having the largest territory/most cities
* Builder: x2 VP from owning key WoWs/longest continuous road
* Scientific: x2 VP from reaching key techs first
* Conqueror: x2 VP from vanquishing other civs/barbs
A trait will be automatically selected for AIs. An important part of
the game would be to figure out your opponents' traits, while not
exposing your own. I would be a game of deception, where you can give
the impression of working hard to grab one key VP to fool you
opponents into spending resources to counter that, while your true
goal is something else.
> The following may give victory points (and other effects) in default
> * Largest space station, 1 point.
> * Longest continuous road, 1 point.
> * Longest continuous wall, 1 point. Only need to pay half as much to
> barbarians to appease them.
> * Each defeated enemy civilization, 1 point.
> * Defeated barbarians, 1 point each time.
> * Largest palace, 1 point. There are several versions of the Palace
> building, in different sizes, just like Settlers of Catan.
> * First circumnavigation, 1 point.
> * First to philosophy, 1 point.
> * First to cure for cancer, 1 point.
> * Possession of Eiffel Tower, 1 point.
> * Greatest Expedition, 1 point. Magellan's < Darwin's < Apollo
I like this 'Greatest X' concept; it should be expanded on:
* Greatest Construction: Colossus < Pyramids < Eiffel Tower
* Greatest Scientific Achievement: Great Library < Leonardo's
Workshop < Cure For Cancer
* Greatest Leisure: Hanging Gardens < JS Bach's Cathedral <
Maybe all WoWs could be sorted into these kind of 'categories' based
on their theme and/or effect and have their graphics color-coded or
something like that.
Freeciv-dev mailing list