Re: Marketing Xconq

["Andreas Bringedal" <anbring at frisurf dot no>]

> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003, Elijah Meeks wrote:
>
> >   Would it be feasible to create a Combat Model 2 that
> > affords the designer more control over combat
> > resolution?
>
> Sure. And I remember that there was some discussion of this a few
> months ago (it might have even been a thread that you started).
> Some of the potential candidates for a new combat model were:
> (1) Numeric superiority should confer an advantage. (As Bill
> mentioned above.)
> (2) Capture should not be allowed until defending occupants have
> withdrawn or been destroyed.
> (3) Make a distinction between point weapons and spread weapons
> (bullets vs. bombs, essentially). I think Bruno Boettcher
> suggested this.


How about damage strength?  Ie rifles against tanks aren't much good.   In
some games they have damage and invulnerability rating.  If the
invulnerability rating of the defense is higher than the damage rating on
the attack you get a large reduction of either to 'to hit' or to 'damage',
per point of difference.  Perhaps this is already in Xconq?


Andreas