From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12416 invoked by alias); 29 Aug 2004 21:22:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 12406 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2004 21:22:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail3.panix.com) (166.84.1.74) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 29 Aug 2004 21:22:45 -0000 Received: from panix5.panix.com (panix5.panix.com [166.84.1.5]) by mail3.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E572981BF; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:22:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from kingdon@localhost) by panix5.panix.com (8.11.6p2-a/8.8.8/PanixN1.1) id i7TLMj302934; Sun, 29 Aug 2004 17:22:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:18:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200408292122.i7TLMj302934@panix5.panix.com> From: Jim Kingdon To: xconq7@sources.redhat.com Subject: lowering independent-density X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg01077.txt.bz2 I've tried a few games each way, and I can verify that lowering independent-density in the standard game back to what it was before 2000 makes the game move much faster. I wasn't clear to me whether it helped the human or the AI (one way or the other). It seemed pretty tedious with the high value for independent-density (as things are in CVS). The discussion is http://sources.redhat.com/ml/xconq7/2004/msg00980.html So I propose to revert the patch mentioned there.