Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

head-to-head, Strategic Conquest-style bombers, and more players

Expand Messages
  • Matt Beh
    a coupla more thoughts: 1) If the head-to-head can be fixed, or, really, brought to the current state of the art with Windows XP (or whatever) and the
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      a coupla more thoughts:

      1) If the head-to-head can be "fixed," or, really,
      brought to the current state of the art with Windows
      XP (or whatever) and the Internet, then we can have a
      heck of a lot more head-to-head games.

      Head-to-head games that are not Hot-Seat, the way most
      people have played, are actually a subtly different,
      amazing form of Empire. For anyone who has not played
      one (and the most I have ever put together was a
      3-player, on an experimental basis), just imagine the
      horror of playing the U.S. in a WW2 scenario and
      watching the Japanese bomb your ships and equipment in
      Pearl Harbor, one by one... or watch the Eastern Front
      from the vantage point of Russia, in real time... it's
      a blast, and I think and hope it's something more
      people will get to appreciate.

      2) Anyone remember playing Strategic Conquest on the
      Mac? That was actually my introduction to Empire.
      There was one different type of unit: the (strategic)
      bomber. Such a bomber could be used to hit either a
      unit or a city; the resulting hit (always a hit, 100%
      success rate) would destroy every unit within the
      blast radius, even friendly units, and turn any cities
      to neutral, including friendly cities. And the blast
      radius would increment over time, such that a bomber
      produced during, say, the first 10 turns would have a
      radius of 2, then one during turns 11-20 would have a
      radius of 3, and so on. In academic and arms-control
      jargon, this kind of tool is called very
      "destabilizing." Still, it's pretty fun. It's not
      too far outside the keep of WW2-level technology as
      embodied in Empire -- just consider it August,
      1945-level WW2 technology. You could make it an
      option.

      3) more players than just 6 would be great. Yes, it's
      hard to get 6 people together as it is, but sometimes
      I want to bring in 5 or 6 humans and a certain number
      of AI as well. With the advent of more head-to-head
      games, as mentioned above, this may be worth doing.
      Plus, it might be an easy programming fix.

      Matt

      Message: 11
      Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:56:24 -0700
      From: "Steven Woodcock" <swoodcoc@...>
      Subject: Re: as a PBEM game

      Oh I agree wholeheartedly....as I said Mark in
      particular
      was amazed.
      Bob, as I recall, was "frumped" that there weren't
      more
      head-to-head games
      played with modem or direct connect, since he's the
      one who put
      together all
      that code. He said I was the only person he knew of
      who ever got
      a 6-player,
      head-to-head, pure serial connection (using null modem
      cables)
      game going.
      (And yes, it was glorious!)

      Steve


      __________________________________________________
      Do you Yahoo!?
      Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
      http://mailplus.yahoo.com
    • Striker
      I have a network setup here and I have managed to get 4 player on the game at one time. That is a great way to play this game!! If we could do this over the
      Message 2 of 3 , Jan 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        I have a network setup here and I have managed to get 4 player on the game
        at one time.
        That is a great way to play this game!! If we could do this over the Net I
        would miss work, sleep,
        meals, and my never ending "Honey Do list".

        This would be great!! :-)


        Leo (Striker)



        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Matt Beh" <matthewbeh@...>
        To: <empire-deluxe@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 2:26 AM
        Subject: [empire-deluxe] head-to-head, Strategic Conquest-style bombers, and
        more players


        > a coupla more thoughts:
        >
        > 1) If the head-to-head can be "fixed," or, really,
        > brought to the current state of the art with Windows
        > XP (or whatever) and the Internet, then we can have a
        > heck of a lot more head-to-head games.
        >
        > Head-to-head games that are not Hot-Seat, the way most
        > people have played, are actually a subtly different,
        > amazing form of Empire. For anyone who has not played
        > one (and the most I have ever put together was a
        > 3-player, on an experimental basis), just imagine the
        > horror of playing the U.S. in a WW2 scenario and
        > watching the Japanese bomb your ships and equipment in
        > Pearl Harbor, one by one... or watch the Eastern Front
        > from the vantage point of Russia, in real time... it's
        > a blast, and I think and hope it's something more
        > people will get to appreciate.
        >
        > 2) Anyone remember playing Strategic Conquest on the
        > Mac? That was actually my introduction to Empire.
        > There was one different type of unit: the (strategic)
        > bomber. Such a bomber could be used to hit either a
        > unit or a city; the resulting hit (always a hit, 100%
        > success rate) would destroy every unit within the
        > blast radius, even friendly units, and turn any cities
        > to neutral, including friendly cities. And the blast
        > radius would increment over time, such that a bomber
        > produced during, say, the first 10 turns would have a
        > radius of 2, then one during turns 11-20 would have a
        > radius of 3, and so on. In academic and arms-control
        > jargon, this kind of tool is called very
        > "destabilizing." Still, it's pretty fun. It's not
        > too far outside the keep of WW2-level technology as
        > embodied in Empire -- just consider it August,
        > 1945-level WW2 technology. You could make it an
        > option.
        >
        > 3) more players than just 6 would be great. Yes, it's
        > hard to get 6 people together as it is, but sometimes
        > I want to bring in 5 or 6 humans and a certain number
        > of AI as well. With the advent of more head-to-head
        > games, as mentioned above, this may be worth doing.
        > Plus, it might be an easy programming fix.
        >
        > Matt
        >
        > Message: 11
        > Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:56:24 -0700
        > From: "Steven Woodcock" <swoodcoc@...>
        > Subject: Re: as a PBEM game
        >
        > Oh I agree wholeheartedly....as I said Mark in
        > particular
        > was amazed.
        > Bob, as I recall, was "frumped" that there weren't
        > more
        > head-to-head games
        > played with modem or direct connect, since he's the
        > one who put
        > together all
        > that code. He said I was the only person he knew of
        > who ever got
        > a 6-player,
        > head-to-head, pure serial connection (using null modem
        > cables)
        > game going.
        > (And yes, it was glorious!)
        >
        > Steve
        >
        >
        > __________________________________________________
        > Do you Yahoo!?
        > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
        > http://mailplus.yahoo.com
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      • genspanky@aol.com
        ... Hi All, I still play Strategic Conquest. I love the bombers! This is the number one thing I would love to see in Empire deluxe. It s so much fun to
        Message 3 of 3 , Jan 1, 2003
        • 0 Attachment

          In a message dated 1/1/03 2:28:26 AM, matthewbeh@... writes:


          2) Anyone remember playing Strategic Conquest on the
          Mac?   That was actually my introduction to Empire.
          There was one different type of unit: the (strategic)
          bomber.   Such a bomber could be used to hit either a
          unit or a city; the resulting hit (always a hit, 100%
          success rate) would destroy every unit within the
          blast radius, even friendly units, and turn any cities
          to neutral, including friendly cities.   And the blast
          radius would increment over time, such that a bomber
          produced during, say, the first 10 turns would have a
          radius of 2, then one during turns 11-20 would have a
          radius of 3, and so on.   In academic and arms-control
          jargon, this kind of tool is called very
          "destabilizing."  Still, it's pretty fun.  It's not
          too far outside the keep of WW2-level technology as
          embodied in Empire -- just consider it August,
          1945-level WW2 technology.  You could make it an
          option.


          Hi All,

          I still play Strategic Conquest. I love the bombers! This is the number one thing I would love to see in Empire deluxe. It's so much fun to vaporize a city!

          GenSpanky


        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.