#44596: Government requirement loss inconsistency
Open Date: 2022-05-15 02:39
Last Update: 2022-05-19 03:49
URL for this Ticket:
https://osdn.net//projects/freeciv/ticket/44596
RSS feed for this Ticket:
https://osdn.net/ticket/ticket_rss.php?group_id=12505&tid=44596
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Last Changes/Comment on this Ticket:
2022-05-19 03:49 Updated by: Anonymous
Comment:
Reply To cazfi
Reply To (Anonymous)
if the check from losing the required tech means the player loses the government they already changed into
That is the current behavior, and - now I checked it - it has been that way as long as losing techs has been possible (since freeciv-2.3)
The inconsistency is that if the government requires, e.g. a wonder (as was with some custom ruleset), loss of that wonder does not cause similar (immediate) loss of current government. In worst case (what player expects least) current government could be lost on some random turn long after the loss of the wonder.
I'm yet to form strong opinion whether we should drop the behavior also from the tech requirements, or extend it to all requirement types. About the improvement requirements you gave as an example, one could do the counter-argument that they are about building the improvement, whereas government requirements are about running the government. Why would you retain your ability to run specific form of government when you no longer know how?
Likely we want to make this somehow ruleset controlled in master, but not sure what to do in stable branches - in any case we need to be careful not to break any assumptions of existing custom rulesets.
Fascinating, I don't think I've ever seen a player lose their government due to insufficient tech (except if the government fell into anarchy for some reason like losing their capital or civil disorder), but something I will look into when running future games, but certainly I'm convinced having the check. As far as I recall (granted, most of my tested games are 2.6.5 either classic, experimental or civ2civ3), as far as improvements and wonders go, in the games I've played and monitored actively, I always thought as long as the city has it and doesn't lose it (conquest or selling or forced selling due to insufficient funds (or city destruction for wonders), they reap the benefit from it (unless the spy/diplomat investigate city window is lying to me about the F/P/T numbers from the city in question)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ticket Status:
Reporter: cazfi
Owner: (None)
Type: Bugs
Status: Open
Priority: 5 - Medium
MileStone: (None)
Component: Server
Severity: 5 - Medium
Resolution: None
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ticket details:
Related a bit to https://www.hostedredmine.com/issues/856947
When a tech is lost, there's a check if the current government can continue functioning. There's no such check for loss of other potential requirements of the government (or acquiring !present requirements). With a wonder requirement, this can even mean that government that has continued functioning despite loss of the wonder, suddenly stops functioning when unrelated tech is lost (because the check is made at that point).
Likely we just should do the check at turn change.
--
Ticket information of Freeciv project
Freeciv Project is hosted on OSDN
Project URL: https://osdn.net/projects/freeciv/
OSDN: https://osdn.net
URL for this Ticket:
https://osdn.net/projects/freeciv/ticket/44596
RSS feed for this Ticket:
https://osdn.net/ticket/ticket_rss.php?group_id=12505&tid=44596