This is the mail archive of the xconq7@sources.redhat.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: Fix "p" command in tcl


Jim Kingdon wrote:
> 
> > Interesting list!  Do you want me to merge it into doc/PROJECTS, or
> > would you prefer to keep it separate?
> 
> Well, in my experience todo lists are more vibrant if they represent
> the priorities of an individual rather than a laundry list.  Maybe the
> best thing is if you want to go ahead and merge it, and then I can
> update my own xconq.html to cite the PROJECTS file.  That way I still
> have my own list of projects which I'm more likely to care about.

OK.

> Separating PROJECTS out into "new features", "usability",
> "playability", "documentation and help" &c might also be somewhat
> relevant.

It's already partitioned by kernel vs interface etc, a second
level of partitioning seems complicated.  (What about a new feature
that's supposed to improve playability?)

> Shrug.  I don't have an opinion about PSL/BSD/Wolfpack or empire.g in
> particular.  But is there a better place to start if I want to play
> with a game which has a lot of logistics in it?  modern.g as mentioned
> in the comment at the start of empire.g?  Or write my own (from
> scratch, or starting with the standard game)?

Yeah, modern.g is supposed to be the "Xconq native" logistics-oriented
game.  I didn't put together a complete paper design though before
trying to code it, so it doesn't have much of a point - that would be
my recommendation before trying to go further?  Is this supposed to
be like an expanded standard game, or more like a SimNation where you
just watch everything run?

> > Making explicit production and run_economy share
> > distribution-of-excess code would be a very sensible step.
> 
> At first glance it wasn't clear to me that this would be easy.  But if
> I want to play with logistics I guess I'll have to tackle the beast.
> Even in the standard game sometimes it seems like sometimes the
> supplies just don't go where you want them, and the only solution is
> (a) overproduce, and/or (b) wait a few turns for material to spread
> out.  And of course it is worse in something like empire.g (e.g. the
> xconq.html item about civilians).

You should think about the overall game play goal, and also consider
whether to use the per-side treasury for materials.  One observation
I'll make is that nearly all of the successful commercial empire-building
games have a global treasury and don't try to get too detailed about
logistics, and I've seen comments from developers where they apparently
tried getting more detailed but threw it out after playtesting.

Speaking of commercial games, AoE has a clever way to make you pay
attention to logistics - the harvesters have to walk back to a
storage unit before the harvest goes into your global store.  So
bad planning results in much slower resource accumulation.  You can
see this in ancient.g too, it partially emulates AoE.

Stan

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