Follow-up Comment #2, patch #1936 (project freeciv):

Your suggested free_units_per_city sounds perfect.
I agree it should affect only to military units, and I agree units that can't
be supported should be disbanded.

If the option "slowly kill unhomecitied units" is enabled, units could be
made unhomed instead of disbanded, but I guess it could enable some exploit
depending on rate of recovering hp... I suppose it is not worth to complicate
it, when it'd need a combo of optional rules.


My doubt is how AI would handle such population limit. In my tests with gold
upkeep, AI do not use to build more units than his total population, but they
do build in some cities more units than the city size, while they do not build
units in other cities. (I know it depends on many variables, but AI
recruitment uses to behave similar with several different ruleset options I
tested).

I guess the rule would help the AI to spread the home of units, to take
better advantage of free upkeep per city, to build more improvements (instead
of units) in the cities with good production, and to avoid the chances of AI
bankrupt due to huge armies that I see often with gold upkeep. Though it is
hard to know until we can test it.
In the other hand, human players use to handle pop growth much better than
AI, and humans use to need less units to attack properly.

>Unit gold upkeep is already possible in the ruleset. I guess that some
government effect already can give a certain number of free units? Am I
wrong?
True, but gold upkeep seems to need some additional rule to limit the number
of units per city, else some aspects of game would not be balanced, mainly
military unhappiness.

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://gna.org/patch/?1936>

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


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

Reply via email to