Re: game flow

[Matthias Grimm <matthias.grimm@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 18:52:26 +0000
Jens Granseuer <jensgr@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Changing all of this issues will make games more exciting 
> > because the situation could change rapidly and the tactical
> > value of transportation vehicles increase.
> 
> I can only speak for myself here, but it was done on purpose
> and I actually like it the way it is. Sure, it makes the
> game a bit slower, but on the other hand you have to think
> about what you do. I especially like the situation when to
> infantry units meet in front of a factory, and nobody dares
> to move in because he'd lose everything in return ;)

A classical deadlock.

This fights seems to be funny in the first glimpse but surprising
and fast attacks to conquer an enemies city (also for at least on
turn :-))  weren't posible in the current configuration. You could
defend a city by simply set an infantry unit beside it. No one
would take the risk of a single and fast comand operation. This
makes the game more calculable and safe for the defender (or
maybe the offender, no one should feel completely safe :-)). 
The inferior party could increase their situation with fast and risky
operations in the heart of the enemies land. 

The following situation might also be interesting: One party heavily
attacks a target and lets a gap in the front line. A transporter with
an infantry unit in it slipped through this gap and conquered the
next outpost. Victory in sight, the attacker suddenly has an hostile
bridgehead in his back. The tactics have to be revised... 

I hope I can convice you to change your mind :-)

  Best Regards
    Matthias