Re: [Human-beings-discuss] primary resources

[Guillaume Cottenceau]

dams <address@hidden> writes:


[...]

> for attacking defending you are right, but you could choos to move at fll 
> speed
> (no economy), thus spending more fuel

"fast move" is an interesting idea.


[...]

> > It's a matter of taste, but I (at least for now) really don't
> > like the fact that a player would need to move back his units for
> > any reason.
> 
> He won't need to "move the unit back", the unit will go back to base
> automatically. And just to rearm, so it's because it fighted.
> Let's forget completely the fuel thing, just keep rearming

I don't like the fact that the unit would automatically go back
to base (following which path anyway? quickest? to the cost of
getting attacked somewhere in the move?) and come back after
rearming.

 
> > Of course I agree that it's more realistic, but it's to the cost
> > of bore, which is in my opinion far more important. I tend to
> > agree with Pixel on that: the first criterion is the playability
> > of the game.
> 
> well. Just keep the amunition, and you will see that's you have more fun.

We could imagine doing it optionally later on, anyway.


[...]

> > > In this space opera game, it was very important, you had to have different
> > > units to attack, because you know that at some time (automatically), some 
> > > of
> > > your unnts will be unavailable, because returning to the nearest refueling
> > > unit. You could (on the defense side) sacrify some force to one enemy 
> > > section
> > 
> > This can be handled by a "mana" energy needed for firing. This
> > was used in WarCraft-2 with Paladin. And this is another time
> > automatic thus playable :-).
> 
> so there is a way we could agree ? :)

Possibly, though I never thought the Mana thing of the Paladin
was really interesting. Do others have idea on that? Complicating
the fight needs to bring an "interest". But this is quite
subjective.


-- 
Guillaume Cottenceau - http://www.frozen-bubble.org/