Given that this is basically turn-based, I don't see any problem. In fact it may enhance diplomacy. Would your cockeyed son marry my bullneck daughter?
The only problem I see is if one human player attacked another, but that can be resolved by having only automatic resolve for human-human battles.
Yeah, it would still be a cool strategy game. Bad that they didn`t do that.
------------------
In the name of electricity: CHARGE!!!
guess : playtesting would simply have lasted faaaar too long. SP campaigns are already looooong, so... If you adjust some tweaks after each campaign, it means the game is ready 1 or 2 months later!!!
------------------
War is not about who is right, only about who is left
War is not about who is right, only about who is left
Having a point of view upon everything is good
Having a view upon every point is better
How exactly would a hotseat battle work when attacking the other human player?
Well, once again my friend, we find that science is a two-headed beast. One head is nice, it gives us aspirin and other modern conveniences. . . but the other head of science is bad Oh beware the other head of science, Arthur, it bites - The Tick
autocalculate battle... which is very dissappointing in itself, i think. but it isnt undo-able
That's no fun at all.
Well, once again my friend, we find that science is a two-headed beast. One head is nice, it gives us aspirin and other modern conveniences. . . but the other head of science is bad Oh beware the other head of science, Arthur, it bites - The Tick
Strategy by mail, Tactics online would be cool. It would take months to end a campaign but who cares?
Quote Originally posted by el_slapper:
guess : playtesting would simply have lasted faaaar too long. SP campaigns are already looooong, so... If you adjust some tweaks after each campaign, it means the game is ready 1 or 2 months later!!!
[/QUOTE]
They playtested?!
Que usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patiencia nostra?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks