A test game for LT36 running with Freeciv 2.5 has started

[wieder]

This is mostly a repost from another thread


The game is online but it may also be restarted when a new and improved ruleset is installed.

You will need a 2.5.x client (2.3.x client will not do).

The address: lt36.longturn.org
port: 5036

Everyone who played in LT34 already have a nation with this test game. If someone who wasn't playing LT34 want to try it out, reply to this thread and we will add you to the game. Not instantly but when the game is restarted.

There is currently at least one known issue I'll fix at a later time. Cities built on rivers do not have a bridge if you don't know the tech for that. This is a change that was introduced with Freeciv 2.5. There may be some similar issues and we need to find those.

I'm not sure how the map is with LT36 test game. It's using the same map settings LT35 has but as the map generator is apparently different from Freeciv 2.3 there may be some surprises.

Please report any issues you have with the game.

[HanduMan]

Cities built on rivers do not have a bridge if you don't know the tech for that. This is a change that was introduced with Freeciv 2.5.

I'd call it an improvement.

Another one of the same sort: If you build a city on a hill (1/1/0) you get +1 food and +1 shield from city center (2/2/0). If you then build a mine in the city you loose that +1 food (because you cannot have both irrigation and mine on a hill, right?) so you get 1/4/0 now (there still exist that +1 shield for city center).

[wieder]

Yeah... Some people like it and some not

We also have the triremes moving on rivers. Looks interesting. Maybe we will keep thát setting unless objects. Another change - or an actual change - I made was making it possible to produce triremes and caravels at the same time. The triremes will be obsoleted with transports and caravels with caravels with galleons. I figured out that in the past there has always been some cheap not that great ships without the capability to go too far from the harbor. Keeping the triremes in production would make that possible and allow the players to build more than one type of ships in the early game. Not sure what the side effects are but in the past it was somehow odd to see people producing several triremes just before inventing magnetism.

That stuff with the hills was another surprise! There are two ways to see that. It's more realistic but also makes the game slightly harder for new players. Maybe we should keep it that way anyway

[taulover]

We also have the triremes moving on rivers. Looks interesting.

IIRC that was already a feature in the default 2.3 ruleset when I first started playing.

[HanduMan]

We also have the triremes moving on rivers. Looks interesting.

IIRC that was already a feature in the default 2.3 ruleset when I first started playing.

Experimental, not default.

[wieder]

Yes, 2.3 allows that but it was never used on LT games. The question is if we want to allow that feature?

The current version of the LT36 ruleset allows the players to build caravels and triremes at the same time. The triremes won't be obsoleted with magnetism but only when the player can build transports. This allows the players to build cheap but weak transport units for a very long time.

[arkan]

There is currently at least one known issue I'll fix at a later time. Cities built on rivers do not have a bridge if you don't know the tech for that. This is a change that was introduced with Freeciv 2.5. There may be some similar issues and we need to find those.

While I understand the motivation behind this change in the standard 2.5 ruleset, I don't like it. It makes choosing river tiles as city place more cumbersome that they need to be IMO.
To restore the former ability to get automatic bridge under the city before one gets the proper technology for that (bridge building), here's the change to apply to the ruleset file terrain.ruleset:

Code: Select all

diff --git a/data/classic/terrain.ruleset b/data/classic/terrain.ruleset
index 1108cb4..3fa908c 100644
--- a/data/classic/terrain.ruleset
+++ b/data/classic/terrain.ruleset
@@ -1213,7 +1213,7 @@ trade_bonus    = 0
 compat_special = "Road"
 native_to      = "Land"
 hidden_by      = "Railroad"
-flags          = "RequiresBridge", "AutoOnCityCenter"
+flags          = "RequiresBridge", "AlwaysOnCityCenter"
 helptext       = _("\
 Roads allow your land units to move more quickly, and on some terrain,\
  also provide a trade bonus.\

[wieder]

Thanks arkan. I have now changed that setting for LT36.

[arkan]

Another one of the same sort: If you build a city on a hill (1/1/0) you get +1 food and +1 shield from city center (2/2/0). If you then build a mine in the city you loose that +1 food (because you cannot have both irrigation and mine on a hill, right?) so you get 1/4/0 now (there still exist that +1 shield for city center).

I remember that kevin551 proposed a patch to keep the free irrigation on hills even when mined (http://forum.longturn.org/viewtopic.php?pid=4044#p4044).
I've changed it a bit, so that mined deserts under city also keep their free irrigation.
Here's his modified patch to effects.ruleset:

Code: Select all

; give +1 food to hill/desert cities with a mine
; this reverts the newly changed no free irrigation if mined
[effect_municipal_water_system]
type    = "Output_Inc_Tile"
value   = 1
reqs    =
    { "type", "name", "range"
      "Special", "Mine", "Local"
      "CityTile", "Center", "Local"
      "OutputType", "Food", "Local"
    }

[HanduMan]

Another one of the same sort: If you build a city on a hill (1/1/0) you get +1 food and +1 shield from city center (2/2/0). If you then build a mine in the city you loose that +1 food (because you cannot have both irrigation and mine on a hill, right?) so you get 1/4/0 now (there still exist that +1 shield for city center).

I remember that kevin551 proposed a patch to keep the free irrigation on hills even when mined (http://forum.longturn.org/viewtopic.php?pid=4044#p4044).
I've changed it a bit, so that mined deserts under city also keep their free irrigation.
Here's his modified patch to effects.ruleset:

Code: Select all

; give +1 food to hill/desert cities with a mine
; this reverts the newly changed no free irrigation if mined
[effect_municipal_water_system]
type    = "Output_Inc_Tile"
value   = 1
reqs    =
    { "type", "name", "range"
      "Special", "Mine", "Local"
      "CityTile", "Center", "Local"
      "OutputType", "Food", "Local"
    }

Hmm... now it gives +1 food for any city tile with a mine. What if, in a custom ruleset, you had some terrain type that can be mined but not irrigated with ability to build a city on?
I'd like to suggest adding one more req in there:

Code: Select all

      "TerrainAlter", "CanIrrigate", "Local"

so you could only get the extra food if the terrain could normally be irrigated.

[arkan]

Thanks HanduMan for your suggestion. It sounds good and works fine.
Here's the modified patch:

Code: Select all

; give +1 food to hills/desert cities with a mine
; this reverts the newly changed no free irrigation if mined
[effect_municipal_water_system]
type    = "Output_Inc_Tile"
value   = 1
reqs    =
    { "type", "name", "range"
      "TerrainAlter", "CanIrrigate", "Local"
      "Special", "Mine", "Local"
      "CityTile", "Center", "Local"
      "OutputType", "Food", "Local"
    }

[wieder]

arkan: Is it enough if I simply add that to the effects file?