Direction of LT
Tue, 04/29/2008 - 07:46 — emj
At the moment LTeX is completely unusable with the ordinary client. I don't think it's a good direction, Freeciv is not ment to handle 2000 units in mass commands but rather moving a low amount of units in a strategic fashion.
There are a couple of things that bother me, first is the insane amount of units you have to move, second scripted moves. The first is quite easy to fix, restart the game on a very small map. The second is harder because everyone want to be a scriptkiddie (even me), but that's not always what is good for the game, see what bots does for MMORPGs.
What do you say about restarting LTeX and limiting the amount of units you spawn with.
RSS: At the moment LTeX is
RSS:
At the moment LTeX is completely unusable with the ordinary client. I don't think it's a good direction, Freeciv is not ment to handle 2000 units in mass commands but rather moving a low amount of units in a strategic fashion.
There are a couple of things that bother me, first is the insane amount of units you have to move, second scripted moves. The first is quite easy to fix, restart the game on a very small map. The second is harder because everyone want to be a scriptkiddie (even me), but that's not always what is good for the game, see what bots does for MMORPGs.
What do you say about restarting LTeX and limiting the amount of units you spawn with.
The second is harder because
What is your evidence that people have hacked their clients to use scripts to play for them, unattended?
Given the future integration of lua into the server (and possibly the client) I don't even understand why this would be a problem. There is no incentive to script freeciv since there is no saved state between games such as the gold, experience, etc. of mmorpgs (putting aside the still experimental rating system on warserver). And even if someone made a succesful script to play for them even half-way decently, this would be wonderful, as it would essentially solve the freeciv AI problem.
Or is this just a complaint against warclient for having features like delayed goto and multiselect (which is in 2.1.x) which the old and unmaintained regular 2.0.x client does not have?
Having seen some ltex savegames, I would tend to agree with this. The design of the respawning mechanism in ltex needs to be better thought-out.
Having seen some ltex
boilerplate.. ;-) Eine ganze satz bitte, as my teacher in german would say. You need too develop that thought more.
I have, elsewhere on the
I have, elsewhere on the site, which I will leave you to find for yourself, since instead of actually replying to my previous questions you prefer to make such unnecessary comments.
After I win, I see no
After I win, I see no problem in restarting. :-)
I agree that the amount of units is insane but it finally makes a game where finding loopholes is less important and thus makes it more realistic (to me, that's a plus).
I could cope with a reduction of about 20%-30% on units.
I like the 'stealing of tech' a lot. To me, it makes the game interesting in multiple levels.
BTW, in my opinion, a script kiddie is someone that will use a script made by someone else without understanding what it does and without knowledge of programming in general.
As in;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
That is not something you wish to be, I am sure.
But I understand your point and I would like to know more about scripted moves. What is it? Did you see some examples?
--
You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you. -- Leon Trotsky
I agree. I thought that
I agree. I thought that number of units will decrease, but it doesn't. I need to weaken respawn algorithm a bit.
I think a problem is that
I think a problem is that once someone gets lots of units, it becomes self-sustaining. A respawner gets lot of units because some well-developped players has lots of units, the next respawner gets lots because the first respawner still has a big army, etc, etc.
Maybe it would help if the number of units respawners get only depends on the number of cities, not on the number of units, of existing players.
So we get:
- strong player has lots of cities
- respawner gets lot of units, destroys cities of the strong player
- new respawner gets fewer units (there are less cities on the map)
etc
instead of:
- strong player has lots of cities
- respawner gets lots of units, destroys cities
- new respawner gets lots of units because the other respawners have lots of units
etc
=== 0h Marduk, thou art chiefest among the great gods! To destroy and to create; speak thou the word, and thy command shall be fulfilled. ===
I have decreased number of
I have decreased number of defending untis, and changed type from L_DEFEND_GOOD to L_FIRSTBUILD.
I have also killed myself to test how it works. Works quite well. I have about 500 riflemen in place of 1000 cruisers :D