This is the mail archive of the xconq7@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the Xconq project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: What to do with Xconq


EastnFront@aol.com wrote:
> 
> And, thought I would comment when I saw you talking about CfNA...
> I had looked over Xconq some months ago for Win95. And, frankly it just
> didn't interest me. I have no clue what it takes to put together something
> like this, and I am sure you have invested a lot of time and effort. I am not
> a programmer like it sounds many of you guys on this list are.

Hey, it's important to have users to tell us programmers whether we're
doing the right things or not!

> Here is a dilemma with several computer wargamers that I am in contact
> with. We are the grognard boardgame types (a few of us have even played
> CfNA). We keep waiting for that great computerized similar version of
> the better boardgaming designs. Details (especially at operational-level)
> like command & control, detailed supply rules, divisional/regimental
> integrity, armor superiority bonuses, that sort of thing. That computer
> wargaming companies have either never seen, or wouldn't know how to
> properly portray anyway.

One of their problems is that all the implementation costs them way more
than they can expect to get in return.  Historical wargames are a rather
narrow niche, which is OK - there are fewer generals than privates too,
and everybody thinks that's a good thing :-) - but in the commercial arena
it means that a lot of cool ideas will never be implemented.

> The graphics and sound are really secondary. As long as the graphics
> are functional, and the interface isn't clunky to use under Win95+. It has
> some kind of an editor to make units or text files that can be assembled
> that would be I guess OK too. So, that monster games could be made
> like 500X500 hexes and be played PBEM. So, no A/I is necessary.

Did you ever look at earth-50km.g?  At 800x320, it stresses Xconq in many
places, but you can play on it, and IMHO it looks pretty awesome...

> Right now the commercial software that we are stomaching just isn't
> cutting it. I have heard you say Xconq is no TOAW. While I like many
> of TOAW's ideas most of them are poorly implemented. So, not being
> like TOAW in many ways is a good thing IMHO.

Unfortunately, TOAW is better than Xconq in quite a few different ways,
so I was mentioning it as a competitor to catch up with!  But with
TOAW, Talonsoft has that cold market reality to deal with, which I
believe will eventually force them to stop work on TOAW.  Meanwhile,
Xconq will continue to grow.

> What I would like to
> see more is the World at War series done back some years ago on
> a bigger scale. So, can Xconq be the engine that we could make
> these kind of sim-games with? Or, am I just completely asking for the
> proverbial moon?

(Heh, WaW is a poster child for the fate of proprietary computer
wargames - try and get one of them nowadays...)

Yes, Xconq can be the engine.  One of its goals is to support the
construction of interesting historical wargames.  This turns out
to be a very ambitious goal, but hey, Asteroids has already been
done. :-)  So although Xconq is closer to the goal than any other
open-source project, our progress still isn't as fast as I would
like - if you have any programmer friends to sucke^H^H^H^H^Hentice
into working on Xconq, send them along!

Another key thing to do is to work on the library.  As others have
commented here, most of the library games are incomplete.  In some
cases, supporting C code is still needed, but most of the time it's
simply that the game rules haven't been filled out completely.  So
it's also valuable to act as a "level designer", just using Xconq as
it stands.  While I have some knowledge of the historical situations,
there are other people who really know the OBs and the odds and all
that detail, and they're the right people to do the actual game designs.

Stan

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]