Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: April 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4044) Revised multiple veteran patch
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4044) Revised multiple veteran patch

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: james.blewitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#4044) Revised multiple veteran patch
From: "a-l@xxxxxxx" <a-l@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 11:59:26 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Concetrated batch of opinions ahead:

I really would recommend clipping the visual and effective number of
veteran levels to 3, plus green.

Green:    No icon, and no mention of the word 'green'. Just normal.
Veteran:  One stripe, or yellow colored 'V' or something.
Hardened: Two stripes, or maybe darkish red, brown 'V'.
Elite:    Three stripes, or maybe black 'V', purple heart / iron
          cross, whatever.

James seems to have 'hardened' before 'veteran', but 'veteran' is
universally recognized as someone who has seen combat. The Elite unit
should have 100% - 150% combat bonus, at least. You should keep track
of 10 (7?) levels internally. Achieving Elite would then require 10
successful checks (minimum 10 victories). Preferably more points or
higher chance of success for killing something tuff. Barracks should
give one level to avoid making Sun Tzu all powerful. You could
generate more interest in the system with a fixed promotion point;
Gaining little levels all the time is boring. There is no reason to
fear that 100%+ is too much, because in the time you could
realistically achieve this, an enemy could research something with
more hit points or firepower. You have to rest the unit in between
combats anyway. And he could always team up a battlegroup to hunt
down your Elite, when you upgrade it. If so inclined you could  opt
for the Stalin strategy (which ultimately succeded) - throwing hordes
of unarmed peasants into the jaws of a crack SS division, dependent
upon picking up the weapons of their fallen comrades. The most
interesting strategy games allow for proper spearhead units.
Historically it's not uncommon for tactically superior units to
defeat several contemporaries with similar armament. I understand a
major explanation for Lord Nelson defeating the French and the
Spanish guy (history remembers the victors) at Trafalgar, was that
the British loaded their cannons faster - they'd simply had more
practice. If SMAC has 7 effective levels, I wouldn't look in that
direction; Sid Meyer is not Tom Clancy. He's just a guy who makes
neat games about dinosaurs and golf. Rather look to SSI and so on.
With 3 effective levels, there should be no need to have a
configurable number of levels. Customizability as a goal in itself
appeals to developers, not to armchair generals.


Arnstein



[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]