Summary: Should 'multiplayer' ruleset enable
borders+foggedborders by default?
                 Project: Freeciv
            Submitted by: jtn
            Submitted on: Sun Dec 12 19:45:46 2010
                Category: rulesets
                Severity: 3 - Normal
                Priority: 5 - Normal
                  Status: Need Info
             Assigned to: None
        Originator Email: 
             Open/Closed: Open
         Discussion Lock: Any
        Operating System: None
         Planned Release: 



The current 'multiplayer' ruleset suggests a setting of borders=DISABLED
(although it can be overridden).

The rational given in 'rewonder' for this is the visibility of enemy
movements it gave through fog of war (from longturn.org
<http://www.longturn.org/node/782/> via forum.freeciv.org
> Borders: Once a player explored a land, it can see the border 
> changes there, so it is not possible to sneak and settle near 
> an enemy's base. This is almost the same with playing without 
> fog of war.

In the forum thread, Book talks about the 'foggedborders' patch as a remedy
for this, and there's discussion of how having no borders causes trouble:
> I expect that the mechanical issues with having no borders 
> (some sneaky opponent founding cities inside your territory 
> for instance) might be just as problematic as the intelligence 
> gathering weakness of borders showing thru fog of war. 

Now that 'foggedborders' is in the standard server, should we change the
multiplayer ruleset to re-enable borders with foggedborders?

(As with bug #17301, I'd recommend setting borders=SEE_INSIDE rather than
just borders=ENABLED, so that you can see changes to your _own_ borders.)

I don't play multiplayer myself, so I don't have a feel for whether there are
other good reasons for disabling borders, or not using SEE_INSIDE. But if
someone says it's a good idea, I'm happy to commit the patch.


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Gna!

Freeciv-dev mailing list

Reply via email to