There are some remaining issues:
Lua bindings are a bit limited, so writing game end on 7 wonders requires a bit of work, which I have not yet done, though it should be doable with hour or couple of work. On the other hand, travelers report shows any wonders build, building and destroyed, also with up to date, current owners. Corbeau said he could track it with some building, but there is no need for any special buildings. So if he wants we can track it. Only problem/peculiarity is:
someone has 6 wonders, captures/builds 7th, Corbeu/tracker does not see it (maybe not even online), then someone else takes one wonder from that player and he now only has 6, no one saw (though likely such person would boast about it
) game does not end. On the other hand this is kinda nice, with human supervision we could request that someone has to keep having 7 wonders for say 5 turns. (well in theory even that could be programmed with Lua). In any case, opinions on this?
Other issues come from usage of tech upkeep, and how tech situation is quite crappy in freeciv
First when you loose tech, it is chosen random (I would prefer that lost tech would be most recent, or at least one that is not a prerequisite to any other known tech). This is not cool in two ways, first of not all techs are created equal so to speak, this means that when loosing tech one person can loose much more vital tech than someone else, all things being equal. This though might be a good deterrent to loosing them, as it can bite oh so bad.
On the other hand, if you loose some crappy tech you no longer need... Say philosophy, it's just better for you - less techs, less upkeep. This tempts me to modify ruleset so that say buildings would not have their effects unless you own their tech. Also possibly making units attack/defense seriously crappy if you loose their techs (I'm less inclined to this, still, might be interesting, or maybe ramp up units upkeep instead of it having crappy stats). Now this would make loosing techs potentially a very very bad , especially loosing library/uni techs would likely mean end game for you, as you would loose so much research output that you would immediately start loosing more techs (also I tested, with sufficient negative research you can loose multiple techs per turn, I for example managed to lose 7 techs in turn in my test game).
Now lastly, most annoying part: tech trade. Trade would allow one getting techs without first having prerequisites, allowing one to circumvent much of the upkeep cost in certain cases. Though maybe this is part of the interest? Dunno, considering this tech cost might need adjusting, that is increasing. Though I would rather like to prevent "holes" in tech tree.
So I talked to devs about these issues on IRC. 2.6 has an option to prevent holes, but 2.5 does not. Though 2.5 has "root_req" which can kinda, a bit, simulate that, somewhat. But dev said it might have performance issues, this might be especially bad considering game will be running on pi. Still I think I should try that and see how much of an issue it might be, because preventing holes in my eyes seems like a very good thing. Though regardless of this, affecting units/buildings of not owned technologies still sounds appealing to me.
So any thoughts on that?