Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.

From: bruno@cerberus.csd.uwm.edu (Bruno Wolff III)

Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1993 05:23:36 +0000

From article <CEDMAN.93Jul7213950@golem.uci.edu>, by cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman):
] 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.
]
I have toyed with rules implementing, something like the above, where turn
reports and/or orders are delayed based on how far away the units are from
the capitol. I kind of came to the conclusion that this might not be a very
playable system. To make it work you need a way to have workable contingency
orders in outlying areas. This is not going to be easy to do well.

References

Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.
cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Thu, 08 Jul 1993 04:39:58 +0000

Referenced By

Re: Ongoing Strategy Games.
cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Thu, 08 Jul 1993 04:39:58 +0000