Re: [Human-beings-discuss] primary resources

[dams]

Guillaume Cottenceau <address@hidden> writes:

> Yoann Padioleau <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > > > -keep in mind the good things from age of empire : At the beginning, 
> > > > you don't
> > > >  have powerfull offense, good and cheap defense, and no fast and big 
> > > > transport
> > > >  (mainly walking). This avoid the starcraft style "I build only zealots 
> > > > with no
> > > >  evolution the faster I can, to destroy quicjly the poor guy spending 
> > > > time
> > > >  evolving its city).
> > > 
> > > Yes, you've already told me so, and I like this idea very much.
> > 
> > I dont like it at all. It is not realistic. the first things to do is to 
> > secure your own city, so if someone build only zealots .... and destroy you
> > then it is normal, "that the way life is". 
> 
> On the opposite, it _is_ realistic. At the very beginning of a
> civilization, transports are very slow, massive destruction
> weapons don't exist... think of the "fire age", it's not
> realistic that a small tribe from somewhere could destroy all the
> other tribes on earth.

and 50000 miles distant. BTW, this reminds me something I wanted to add:
The units could use energy. e.g. : you have to rest if you walk too fast, you
need oil to refewl your army, and you need to repair the vehicules when using
it a long time. It could also cost ressources to have vehicules/units even if
they don't do anything, just to avoid the deteriorates. These cost are less
important for defense.

This seems complicated to handle when playing, but it's not if those costs are
very low. they will be important only if you have a huge army, or if you don't
do anything of your offense power. This can be nice to avoid that one player
with superior army automatically wins. But this concept should not bring down
the playability, and fun.

wdyt?