Test of influence of settlers' pop(ulation)_cost=2 on AI

[Iksp]

One of main drives of intensive expansion, including smallpox, is it, that at the expense of 1 citizen one gets 2 tiles used in a new city. I think balanced game means no easy choices, so I changed settlers' pop_cost to 2 citizens to balance effects. I lowered u(p)k(eep)_shield and uk_food to 0, because it is balanced by a lost opportunity to earn from a tile by building a settler and decreasing number of citizens by two can makes troubles with upkeeping others units. To my surprise on a vast map (1,000 land tiles/civ, 10 civs) nearly all AIs' expansion stopped after building a few cities with some diversity in cities distance and with no terrain improvement. On smaller map (100 tiles/civ, 10 civs) 1 democracy carried mass colonization, maybe because it was allied with most AIs. Most AIs were communists and built army until they couldn't, some democracies built buildings and started building a space rocket. At standard pop_cost=1 AIs show more diversity in strategy.

[JTN]

What version of Freeciv did you do this test with, out of interest?

[Iksp]

Sorry. 2.4.1 on default ruleset

EDIT with all technologies and max money on start, so maybe before communism they would be more expansive. AIs are stingy and often build coinage no matter how much they have.