Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.

From: cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)

Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1993 04:39:58 +0000

In article <21f9enINN7tl@uwm.edu> bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III) writes:
   I would like to see more discussion on this topic. I haven't been
   too impressed by many ongoing games I have seen. I think your idea
   of having the rules favor forming vassal states is a good
   one. Though it may not be easy to do.

You could for example require that a unit receiving orders must be in
the same location as the unit giving the orders.  Furthermore require
that a unit giving a report must be in the same location as the one
receiving.  The player only sees events which have been reported all
the way back to his main unit and units only receive orders which have
been transmitted in some fashion all the way down to them.

Add to this relatively slow movement and a single player sustaining a
large empire without other players as vassals which manage part of the
empire becomes a real challenge.

Growth seems to be one of the major sources of enjoyment of this
   type of game.  Providing for unlimited growth appears to be a
   difficult problem to solve in a satisfactory way.  Constantly
   having new things to be discovered is more doable, but is still
   difficult to do a good job on.

Under the above proposal unlimited growth is still possible in
principle, but in practice it will be limited by the same factors
which limited the growth of many historical empires.

Carl Edman

References

Ongoing Strategy Games.
js138@cus.cam.ac.uk (John Sloan)
Sun, 04 Jul 1993 03:24:37 +0000
Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.
bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III)
Wed, 07 Jul 1993 19:50:47 +0000

Referenced By

Ongoing Strategy Games.
js138@cus.cam.ac.uk (John Sloan)
Sun, 04 Jul 1993 03:24:37 +0000
Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.
bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III)
Wed, 07 Jul 1993 19:50:47 +0000