> If the players can attempt to do something about these nukes then itWhat's so bad about just getting summarily nuked, thereby ending your
> increases tension. If they can't then it leads to the "I'm sick of
> this - you win" scenario before the game is actually completed.
> *That* sucks.
suffering? Do you bitch and moan when playing tennis against someone who's
clearly a lot better than you, or do you attempt to learn from the
experience? Do we design a game for people who don't want to put hours of
practice into being good at it? That certainly wouldn't be tennis, and
consider how trivial the rules of tennis are. The complexity comes from the
players, not the game rules. I think there's a big question of how much
pandering to player ego we really need, vs. just forcing "sportsmanship."
Sportsmanship says it's ok for there to be winners and losers, because it's
If getting nukes was random, yes I'd have a problem with it. I don't think
shuffling a deck of cards and waiting to see who's the first to draw an Ace
of Spades is much of a game. But getting nukes in these games is never
random, there's always some known mechanism you have to go through to
acquire the nukes. What do you want, reminders for the attention
challenged? "Hey dumbass, your opponent is using early 20th century
technology. Mighn't you be worried about your sunblock level?"
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA
For plot and pace, writers use words; game designers use numbers.
Anything understood over time has plot and pace.
- What have the mechanisms been like in real life? The promise of unbelievable
wealth (oil, gold, spice)?
Basically, you are asking "why don't nations grow in one big city?" You are
very close, but these resources are rare (geographically), so a game
shouldn't rely too much on them.
Farmland for food would be a more common reason for expansion, or a source
of building materials. These are important items, in heavy demand, and a
person with access to them in large quantities could become very wealthy
very quickly. Other resources may play a part.
Another reason is interaction with other races. A person being able to
provide items not available in their homeland (such as jewels, rare food,
or technology) could also become wealthy. Now this in itself does not
directly cause new cities to be set up, but it does cause expansion of your
population, and way-stations may be set up to take advantage of merchants
moving between cities.
In addition, certain civilizations may be slightly xenophobic, forcing
merchants to set up smaller enclosures outside a city. In theory, these
could act like embassies, which count as the owning country's soil. In
other words, if you set up one of these enclosures, it would be like a
small city, as people would live there, and it would have its own services
(subject to certain local laws, of course). Hmmm, how to model this, though?
But you also have to remember that, when many of these settlements were set
up, they were independent (especially somewhere like Greece) and not always
friendly to each other. An independent city may have split up, with the
more passive faction being forced out to set up camp elsewhere.
Lastly, as you mention, the government may offer incentives for settling in
a certain area.