Re: [gamedesign-l] 1 build per turn
- On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> What happens if you make one of these 4X games, and every city builds at least 1If units require support, then each turn you'll have less free resources
> unit per turn? It could be 1 really good unit, or several not-so-good units,
> owing to available resources. If the resources are pathetic, then you produce 1
> really pathetic unit. But you are not allowed to sit around for multiple turns
> waiting to build a much better unit.
> "Available resources" is a big question. If the number of units you can have is
> limited by available supporting resources (minerals, food, etc.) then there's a
> strong incentive to treat all units as cannon fodder. Send 'em out, watch 'em
> die, make new and better ones. But if units don't have any ongoing resource
> costs, then the cities would just keep cranking out the best possible unit(s)
> each turn.
and thus you'll produce worse and worse units, until you're out of free
resources. If no support is required, having mega-cities with huge
production is obviously a winning tactic (i.e. specialize, if one city can
support another with food, the supported one can make minerals, I'm
thinking CivII and SMAC-like resources here).
If support is required, then using the newest units (the ones made with
least resources) as cannon fodder and keeping the first ones (made with
most resources) for special use is probably the best.
How about no support, but limited lifetime (see the ant wars -comment
below). That way the lifetime will limit the magnitude of the army. Cities
might have something that affects the lifetime so that the resource
production isn't the only factor in having a large army. You can produce
less units but have them live longer.
> If you allow resources to be stockpiled instead of forcing a unit to be created,How about some sort of "region" commands that the units try to fulfill the
> then the player has a way to take multiple turns to produce 1 unit. Maybe this
> should be disallowed, to keep the purity of the vision.
> The game would be about moving hordes of units. It might end up looking like a
> particle system. I'm wondering what high level commands would be required to
> keep it playable.
best they can, e.g.:
Guard: specify a region and tell how many units should guard it. If the
game has a concept of borders, then your homeland could be automatically
guarded by number of units that is n% of the area in some units (squares,
square kms). Basically this would make units patrol the area and attack
intruders. Add rules for diplomacy (don't attack unless war declared etc.)
if needed (units might try to block the offending units if no war
Attack: move to specified region and kill enemies.
Stockpile: to avoid the units to move one by one to strongly fortified
region and getting slaughtered it would probably be good to specify a
region where units gather and when there are enough units they perform
some command (attack, I guess) associated with this stockpile command.
Strike: like attack, but just go to the target, wreck any terrain
improvements (still thiking of CivII and SMAC here) and come back. Would
be handy for harassing the enemy near the border while getting ready for
Priorities between commands would determine which one gets the new units
when there aren't enough (e.g. during a war). Put guard in high priority
and units aren't stockpiled nor do attacks/strikes happen until the
requirements for defence are fulfilled. Lower the guard priority and you
can get more units for attack.
Priorities should probably be set region-wise, so that it is possible to
give lower priority for guarding regions next to friendly neighbors while
maintaining the normal level of guard close to your enemies.
I think also some way of associating stockpile with attack and strike is
needed. E.g. after a region has enough units, those units perform some
specific attack or strike order. Thus they wouldn't start wondering
accross the land to make an attack to a far-away target when there's
targets nearby (might happen if far-away target has high priority). Maybe
put different stockpiles on sets and associate a set of attack/stike
commands with each set. Also a way to carry out commands simultaneously
would be needed. E.g. one group of units would perform a strike or attack
to a region surrounding enemy city and another group attacks the city.
First group tries to ensure that no reinforcements arrive and it could
possibly disrupt resource production so that the city won't be able to
make more defenders. First group wouldn't touch the city, so a way to
exclude an area from a region (maybe just cities) is needed. That'd allow
siege. Second group attcks the city when first group has cleared the path.
> Ant wars, basically.Perhaps some building orders would be needed, e.g. when making units, make
worker, soldier, worker, soldier etc. If number of units gets very high,
just set percentages of units to produce (50% workers, 50% soldiers) or
specify the percentages of existing units that should be maintained
(increase % of soldiers when preparing for war). If available resources
only determine the quality of unit, then a way to set the unit the city
will preferably produce is likely needed. That way you could get
high-quality soldiers at the expense of workers. Or vice versa, if
high-quality worker produces more resources.
Tel:(013)251 5329 |
GSM: 040 774 3722 |