[Freeciv-Dev] [Usenet][ICS] Re: Where even MoM comes up short

[Raimar Falke <i-freeciv-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

While talking about Master of Magic (MoM):

http://groups.google.de/groups?hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&frame=right&th=421d54b7e40c72c5&seekm=yGNxb.85467%24Eq1.16148%40twister.rdc-kc.rr.com#link13

Interesting points here:

  > Gameplay concludes when a player has reached a certain number of
  > victory points.

  You can do that with Space Empires IV, too.  Actually, what I want
  is for games to stay challenging longer.  I keep winning before I
  get to put the cool high tech stuff into action.  Yes, one can start
  the game with the whole tech tree revealed, but that's not as fun.

an idea:

  How about slowing the big empires down by introducing weaknesses?
  If an empire is small and threatened, its people pull together and
  can be quite effective. If an empire gets large, powerful and
  wealthy, corruption and rivalry will set in. This could be modeled
  by introducing some additional rules:

  a) bribery for information: spying the enemy would carry a cost
  inversely proportional to the size of teh empire, i.e. it would be
  cheap to spy ona large foe and expenive to spy on a small one

one answer:

  In my experience when a game tries to limit your power when you grow
  large (eg civ 3 and its corruption model) I find it frustrating.
  These systems serve only to alleviate an AI's shortcomings and
  frustrate the player by elongating the victory time.  I dont want
  all my hard work ruined by the game allowing the crappy small
  nations to bribe my kick-arse hero unit simply because I played
  better than them.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "If at first you don't succeed... well so much for skydiving."