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: "Per I. Mathisen" <per@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 12:23:11 -0700
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, a-l@xxxxxxx wrote:
> 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.

I think this is fine for default settings. The question is, however, how
customizable we want it to be for modpacks, including, most importantly,
SMAC, which requires 7 levels AFAIK. The graphics support for veteran
levels must cope with any flexibility allowed by the ruleset.

I do not know how many extra miles we should be willing to go to enable
100% SMAC support. Any new modpack can certainly manage to create a good
game within the parameters of 4 veteran levels.

> You should keep track
> of 10 (7?) levels internally. Achieving Elite would then require 10
> successful checks (minimum 10 victories).

I wouldn't call that levels. Rather, "number of successful checks required
for new level". Those are different, and should be handled differently.

> Preferably more points or
> higher chance of success for killing something tuff.

Good idea.

> Barracks should
> give one level to avoid making Sun Tzu all powerful.

You mean barracks + Sun Tzu = +2 levels, or not?

> 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.

It is a nitpick, but the breakthroughs in that war always happened when
they _didn't_ follow this strategy, but instead put those peasants in
tanks and behind artillery. Granted, even then the Russians did rely on
numbers granted by their immense industrial capacity rather than quality,
which had been severely stunted by internal repression.

  - Per




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