This is the mail archive of the
xconq7@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Xconq project.
Re: Game unit design: a shield
- From: Lincoln Peters <peters2000 at mindspring dot com>
- To: Hans Ronne <hronne at pp dot sbbs dot se>
- Cc: leebc11 at acm dot org, Xconq mailing list <xconq7 at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: 21 Jul 2002 07:38:01 -0700
- Subject: Re: Game unit design: a shield
- References: <l03130300b9602cc6ff8f@[217.115.37.57]>
The only problem I'd see with using combat model 1 is that it would not
be possible for characters to retreat from battle or effectively gang up
on other characters. Using combat model 0, you could attack a stronger
unit with several weaker units, have each weaker unit retreat as it
became damaged, and still destroy the stronger unit. This would not
work in combat model 1; you would only be able to send in attacking
units one at a time, and you'd probably lose a lot more of them.
Maybe there
On Sun, 2002-07-21 at 02:29, Hans Ronne wrote:
> Check out the Lord of the Rings game, or rather its base module 3rd-age.g.
> The Ring in that game works pretty much the way you want, except for the
> fact that it confers a higher attack value on the bearer. This is achieved
> through the table occupant-affects-attack which could be changed to
> occupant-affects-defense in your case. To use these tables, you need to use
> combat model 1, though (the Civ-type combat model). I would recommend it
> anyway if you are writing a new game since it is easier to use in the sense
> that units have absolute attack and defense values instead of the relative
> values (the hit-chance table) that you find in combat model 0.
>
> Hans
>
> Hans Ronne
>
> hronne@pp.sbbs.se
>
>