[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Update of patch #1936 (project freeciv): Planned Release: = 2.4.0 ___ Follow-up Comment #14: rebased patch (no further changes) (file #11223) ___ Additional Item Attachment: File name: 20101115-trunk-limit-units-with-gold-upkeep-support-by-a-city-if-up.patch Size:7 KB ___ Reply to this item at: http://gna.org/patch/?1936 ___ Nachricht geschickt von/durch Gna! http://gna.org/ ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Follow-up Comment #13, patch #1936 (project freeciv): I was thinking trade after... well trade (routes) happened ;). That is still limited but has different dynamics then either pop limit or shield limit. Each city has a certain amount of trade, so the amount of resources that can _locally_ be used by a city is limited (yet higher then the amount of gold by workers. But I think either limit makes sense and my offer is just that, an alternative : ___ 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
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Update of patch #1936 (project freeciv): Status:None = In Progress ___ Follow-up Comment #11: untested patch: limit units with gold upkeep support by a city if upkeep is paid in a lumped sum by the nation * new ruleset setting: free_military_units * limit is: city size + free_military_units * what to do with units with the F_UNDISBANDABLE flag (also for killunhomed)? * can one rehome unhomed units? (file #10293) ___ Additional Item Attachment: File name: 20100908-10-trunk-limit-units-with-gold-upkeep-support-by-a-city-if-up.patch Size:7 KB ___ Reply to this item at: http://gna.org/patch/?1936 ___ Nachricht geschickt von/durch Gna! http://gna.org/ ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Follow-up Comment #12, patch #1936 (project freeciv): I'm glad you implemented the population limit, I'll test it. Although I still think the Trade limit was a good alternative. With gold_upkeep_style = 0 a city can be the home for more units than his gold production, as long as your global treasury ends positive. And it is possible to rehome all your units to same city. Only if the treasure falls under zero the units/buildings would start to be disbanded, so there is not really a limitation. Trade is not affected by markets, banks, taxman citizens, nor by the tax rate, so it is a stable value. In fact, trade in a city use to be similar than the shield production, and it would create a limitation similar to default upkeep by shields. I also like limitation based on population because it is more restrictive, more stable, and I guess it would get wars more even. And it makes sense you can recruit only a percentage of your population for military units. For modern units as fighters you would need to recruit less people, but the percentage of population that can be teached to pilot a fighter is also smaller, so the pop limit still makes sense to me. ___ 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
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Follow-up Comment #8, patch #1936 (project freeciv): Should this be limited to military units? I can't see why we would need to limit Workers, Caravans, etc. For us informed, do Diplomats count as military units? What should happen if the city size is reduced? Kill random units till the maximum supported number is reached? That seems to be the easiest solution to implement, though if it's not too unwieldy i'd prefer the unhome/slowly kill method. ___ 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
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Update of patch #1936 (project freeciv): Depends on: = bugs #16665 ___ Reply to this item at: http://gna.org/patch/?1936 ___ Nachricht geschickt von/durch Gna! http://gna.org/ ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Follow-up Comment #9, patch #1936 (project freeciv): I can't see why we would need to limit Workers, Caravans, etc. For us informed, do Diplomats count as military units? As they have the flag NonMil the answer is given by the ruleset definition. ___ Reply to this item at: http://gna.org/patch/?1936 ___ Nachricht geschickt von/durch Gna! http://gna.org/ ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Follow-up Comment #4, patch #1936 (project freeciv): If a city can't support a unit anymore, then perhaps another city can, just like in real life. So, I think that 'units' should migrate to any city that has upkeep points availabe. If there isn't any city with upkeep available, then, just now, the units should be disbanded (if they were loyal to the king) or, with some propability, changed into barbarians (if they weren't loyal). KeyserSoze. ___ 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
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Follow-up Comment #5, patch #1936 (project freeciv): I think migrating the unit is not a solution. This would open the possibility to easily 'move' a unit. Trade could be a possible limiting factor. For the AI some 'magic' must be done so that the units are distributed over all cities. ___ Reply to this item at: http://gna.org/patch/?1936 ___ Nachricht geschickt von/durch Gna! http://gna.org/ ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Follow-up Comment #6, patch #1936 (project freeciv): I admit I like the suggestion to use trade more than mine to use population. I didn't liked at first because peaceful governments (democracy/republic) increase a lot the trade, but those govs also increase the population due to rapture growth. It would make celebrations under monarchy/communism a bit more useful, and it makes sense that roads, superhighways, trade routes and even the Colosus to increase your supported army. I'm also liking the idea to switch the home city to another that can support it. It is true it would be an easy way to move a unit, but it is not so important under gold upkeep, I see it a good thing to reduce micromanaging, and it would act automatically as the magic needed for the AI. In fact, under gold upkeep styles where units are paid in a lump sum, the home city is not important except to cause military unhappiness. In this scenario, it is not an advantage that unsupported units suddently switch to random cities. I really liked the suggestion by KeyserSoze, though I'm also new here, is up to developers to decide. ___ 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
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Follow-up Comment #7, patch #1936 (project freeciv): Just to add a little more on the trade idea: A well balanced game would treat gold(trade) upkeep very similar to shield upkeep. As the game stands it is not hard to have cities produce massive numbers of shields but very little trade. What limits those industrial cities from making infinite military units is the unhappy citizens. Using trade really is no different, a unit's home city has to pay for it in gold and in citizen moral. Because each city has a set amount of trade resources; no one city can be the home city to an infinite unit count. Plus remember cities have to use gold to pay for their improvements as well. Paying for those probably should happen before paying for military units (not real sure on this). From a player standpoint a limit on unitcount based on trade makes more intuitive sense then a limit based on how many people the city has. You have to pay for these units, richer cities are going to be able to afford more then poorer cities. Even if the units were built(trained) in an industrial/shield city then based at a rich city; there still is a natural constraint based on city resources. Building things at a factory and using the output to defend a nation's wealth has been done by nations all throughout history. ___ 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
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
URL: http://gna.org/patch/?1936 Summary: limit the number of units a city can support Project: Freeciv Submitted by: syntron Submitted on: Montag 06.09.2010 um 23:08 Category: rulesets Priority: 5 - Normal Status: None Privacy: Public Assigned to: None Originator Email: Open/Closed: Open Discussion Lock: Any Planned Release: ___ Details: see bug #16413 point 1): limit the number of units a city can support To balance gold upkeep David Fernandez proposed to limit the number of units a city can support to the size of the city. This could include a new ruleset option 'free_units_per_city'. If it set to -1 there is no limit at all. Else it gives the number of 'free' units. Example: free_units_per_city = 5 city size = 2 = 5 unit possible city size = 5 = 5 unit possible city size = 6 = 6 unit possible city size = 9 = 9 unit possible Some questions: Should this be limited to military units? What should happen if the city size is reduced? Kill random units till the maximum supported number is reached? ___ Reply to this item at: http://gna.org/patch/?1936 ___ Nachricht geschickt von/durch Gna! http://gna.org/ ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Update of patch #1936 (project freeciv): Priority: 5 - Normal = 1 - Later ___ Reply to this item at: http://gna.org/patch/?1936 ___ Nachricht geschickt von/durch Gna! http://gna.org/ ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #1936 (project freeciv): 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? ___ Reply to this item at: http://gna.org/patch/?1936 ___ Message posté via/par Gna! http://gna.org/ ___ Freeciv-dev mailing list Freeciv-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/freeciv-dev
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
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
[Freeciv-Dev] [patch #1936] limit the number of units a city can support
Follow-up Comment #3, patch #1936 (project freeciv): I don't know if this has been proposed or is currently done as I'm still new to both the game and the code. Instead of limiting the number of units a city can support under gold upkeep rules, perhaps limit what gold can be used for the unit upkeep. Units under shield upkeep are limited by the number of shields a city produces. The equivalent for gold upkeep could be the amount of trade a city has. ___ 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
