Re: fixes to advance.g

[Stan Shebs <shebs at shebs dot cnchost dot com>]

Jim Kingdon wrote:
> 
> > BTW, the same applies to construction costs.
> 
> Well, yeah, something needs to be done about construction.  The other
> culprit here is the way that after a little while one is able to
> produce huge numbers of units (due to city size? or ore?).  If you
> just make the fancier units cost more, I think you might have the case
> where the optimal (but rather boring to execute) strategy is to build
> massive numbers of dumb units and have them just clog up the
> battlefield (takes ACP to kill them off).

(Pay)CivII solves this by requiring cities to "support" the units they
produce.  If you have too many units, they consume supplies that would
otherwise go into city growth, thus throttling things back nicely.

> > 4. The hardcoded Granary code is something Stan added for the Civ2 game.
> > That was done after I wrote my game, hence the now duplicated effect. I
> > don't mind if you remove it, but you should check with Stan first. The Civ2
> > game probably needs to be modified in that case.
> 
> Stan?  I hope you aren't going to seriously request that the code be
> retained as it is ;-).  Maybe it is just as simple as having civ2.g
> set um_occ_mult_production?

I did that in lieu of trying to figure out and add the necessary tables
at the time, was trying to understand how Civ2 games were supposed to
work.  Dunno if um_occ_mult_production would have the right effect,
would need to compare with the original game.  (Sid Meier made some
very clever and subtle tradeoffs, Freeciv folks have been learning
about those the hard way... :-) )

Stan