Jump to content

Phoenix-TheRealDeal

WFG Retired
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1.723

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Phoenix-TheRealDeal

  6. New Screenshots - 8/1/04

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Yes, looking very, very good! :D

    Keep the Stone Henge for the Scenario Editor... it is too good to give up.

    KISS it for the Celtic Temple (Health Centre).... just make a circle of large 'stately' oak trees and plop down a flat 'alter stone' inside of them. Put a couple or several different animal heads (skulls) on totem stakes around it to signify the 'spirits' of the 'druidic world' and perhaps a burning torch to signify the life-giving quality of 'light' and 'fire'. Have a prop-point-attachment to the centre-top of the stone so that when a druidic priest is 'garrisoned within' he is standing there and going about waving his arms and staff wolololo-ing when there are units to be healed brought within close proximity of the 'sacred grove' (i.e., garrisoned priest speeds up the healing process)... which may appear to have a pathway or two from the outside-in between the trees (though not in reality).

    Well, that's my 2-bits. :)

  13. Rock Paper Scissors

    in Game Development & Technical Discussion

    Posted

    I think thatyouguys have pretty well covered the 'discusion' of the RPS paradigm and I still like it in its last version... so I don't really have anything to add.

    Well, one minor point:

    So take the slinger for example... these guys are pretty weeny anyway. Relitively little to no armour and as they gain rank, it will probably only effect their attack strength and accuracy. Pretty fragile dudes.

    Yes, the Slinger is pretty weenie in that he is nearly naked and rather unencumbered... but remember that what he lacks for in armour may be made up for in speed.

  16. Rock Paper Scissors

    in Game Development & Technical Discussion

    Posted

    I still like Jason's rendition of the RPS model best.

    While at first it looks like Stu's rendition is 'simpler', once graphed-out it looks quite a bit more complex than first meets the eye.

    Also, I find better 'rationale' in Jason's. For example, I can find weapons-handling 'justification' for each bonus-countering in all but one juxtaposition. Frex, why would, for one pairing, the Infantry Javelinist accrue a bonus against the Cavalry Javelinist? Well, first we can presume that each unit has basically pretty much the same range in throwing... there is only so much strength imparted by the arm, and the speed of the horse is not going to add appreciably to that (if any)... so while the movement of the horse itself presents a bit more difficult of a target the mere fact that the infantryman has an opportunity to 'plant his feet' upon throwing makes him a more stable launch platform that I think gives him a bit of an advantage against the cavalry unit... once either are in range of the other. So, that 'makes battlefield sense'... and I can 'find that' type of rationale for all but one. I cannot make all those same 'connections' based upon Stuart's version.

    The ONE that is giving me a bit of difficulty in 'appreciating' is the Infantry Swordsman in opposition to the Cavalry Javelinist. I'm not to sure about what to do with that one; maybe it is OK... as long as we all recognise that the ground-pounder swordsman must close quarters with the horsed javelinist in order to reap the benefits of his bonus... and that under normal circumstance, I would think, could be rare.

    Without meaning to belabour the issue, what Jas has come up with is darned near 'perfect' in concept, methinks. It's true that it departs from the typical AoK/AoM 'model' by some stretch, but it does make more 'sense'... and it is something that I struggled 'mightily' with for a long time trying to get that *depth*... and then had to personally settle for the more simplified version that I'd submitted--not having been able to 'put it all together'. :P

    Hey, Stu! Ya think we oughta promote him to Co-Lead Designer, too? :P I mean like first the Tech Tree deal and now this? :)

    Well, outa here again.

  17. Rock Paper Scissors

    in Game Development & Technical Discussion

    Posted

    I'm in here for just a sec becuz I am still on LOA, but couldn't pass on looking at this... another hurculean effort by the boss to resolve a dillemna that I boggled down in.

    I can see players pausing in the middle of play to pull out that table and think frantically "now what can I use to counter Infantry Archers"?

    OK. That's what I did a lot of when learning to play AoK.... and despite my fat-fingering, etc., I did learn to play the game. I must admit that I rather like the depth.... though I haven't had time to really study the proposal, nor will I have soon... I think it is 'impressive'. And that's not meaning to take anything away from Stu's counter-proprosal (which ya'll can work on).

    Oh, Stu, you've got Cavalry Spearman having a countering bonus against Cavalry Spearman 'up there'. That sorta looks like one of my miscabobbles.

    Out here..... lookin' a lot better than it was. :P

  22. 0 A.d. Sequel Ideas?

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    How about something set during the Neolythic age?

    Now that's an interesting thought that hasn't been done before. :)

    You could use Jean Auel's "Clan of the Cave Bear" series of books ("Earth's Children") to do the research for it.... and do it as an RTS.

×
×
  • Create New...