On 7/25/08, Daniel Markstedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 19:02:47 +0900, Per Inge Mathisen > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 6:34 PM, Madeline Book <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >> I disagree with this game rule, it is not good for gameplay. > >> The reason being is that it would make sneaking up on cities > >> easier. An example would be a trireme that only has to see a > >> worked ocean tile to find where the city is located, in essence > >> giving it a larger vision radius near a city. This is also the > >> reason why almost all 2.0 multiplayer games disable borders; > >> it gives too much information to attackers and unbalances the > >> game. > > > > There was a suggestion some years(?) ago that players should have full > > vision inside their borders, to offset such information leakage. I > > think that is a reasonable idea.
It might be interesting to try this out, but it does not address the problem that when someone finds the border edge, they get extra information that someone has a city near there. I realize this is hardly significant when playing with AIs or novice players, but knowning where your opponent is (and without him knowing that you know that) can be the difference between a win and a loss for two expert human players. There is also the issue that players can essentially see through the fog since border information is sent even when a tile is fogged. So for example they can see when a city changes owner by the changing of the border around the city tile. > >> (Also, I would like borders to be fogged like units and cities > >> too, but that is an issue for another ticket...) > > > > You mean last seen borders would be "remembered" by the player, > > instead of being given as it really is? IIRC, and this starts being > > quite a while ago, the first borders implementation was like this. It > > was a horrible mess. I do not think you want to go back there. What > > problem would this solve, in any case? > > > > - Per > > > > > I remember a time (sometime in early 2.1 alpha) when we had this > implementation - it was above all a visual mess. You had to constantly go > and re-explore the surrounding terrain to 'clean up' the border residue > cluttering the view. > > Instead I would suggest simply not displaying borders of hostile players > at all in fogged tiles. This would remedy the multiplayer balance issue, > while still giving some idea of the political layout of the world since > you can always see the borders of friendly players. This is one way it could be handled I suppose. My own idea would be to only send updated border information when the unit sees the source of that border (a city or fortress I presume). This would avoid the "visual mess" of partial seen borders (at least to the granularity of sources rather than individual tiles) and not give extra hints to attackers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 手を打とうとしましたが、貧乏なので難しい事になってしまいました。 _______________________________________________ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freecivfirstname.lastname@example.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev