Re: [Human-beings-discuss] trying to move on

[Guillaume Cottenceau]

dams <address@hidden> writes:

> > * removals
> > 
> >     You don't destroy enemy batiments, you capture them (with a
> >     cost of adaptation): more realistic, more interesting.
> 
> I vote to keep this feature, but with modifications, so that it is simple and
> interesting:

I don't discuss your points, with which I fully agree. And
actually, I'd truely prefer to re-use batiments, I just thought
it was not very logical when mixed with the "big city" and "very
few cities" axioms.

Maybe, being able to reuse only annex cities would be a solution.

[...]

>  - have some unique batiments like emperor palace, congres ... that makes your
>    city stronger, with better properties (increased population, attractive,
>    etc...) so that it has 90% to be the biggest, the more prolific, and so on.

Yep.
 
>  - I'm sorry to talk about that again, but the best way to keep the game
>    central (a "civ" attacking from its main city, no other too big citys) is 
> to
>    introduce fuel. Don't say no yet, read this : each unit needs fuel. Certain
>    units can extract fuel, other transport them. you'll have truck, tanker (or
>    equivalent). But everything *fully* automated ! The user won't have to do
>    anything to refuel, the units will do that themselves. BUT it's very 
> usefull
>    because you cannot take 2 cars and discover the entire map. It prevent from
>    attacking with only attack units, 2000 kms away, complitely cut from the
>    city/refulling system. And it brings a lot of strategic things, like
>    attacking fuel truck instead of defending units. So a week enemy has not
>    lost the game. amha you whould think about it again, you'll see that it
>    brings usefull things. And if you automates everything concerning
>    refuelling, you don't have bad side.

The background idea is rather good but I always thought it would
be more of a pain than a really enjoyable feature of the game.
Maybe the strategy of attacking the fuel transports would be a
plus, yes. Maybe you're right after all.

It goes along pretty well with another idea of the game: the more
advanced your batiments/units are, the more powerful they are but
they are also complex thus fragile because they need many
different goods to operate.

Anyone else has an opinion on that topic?


-- 
Guillaume Cottenceau - http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~gc/