This is the mail archive of the
xconq7@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Xconq project.
Re: Forcing the player to resign in single player
- From: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple dot com>
- To: "Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery at indiegamedesign dot com>
- Cc: xconq <xconq7 at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 23:02:04 -0800
- Subject: Re: Forcing the player to resign in single player
- References: <OOEALCJCKEBJBIJHCNJDIEHFGLAB.vanevery@indiegamedesign.com>
Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
Does anyone else feel that it's annoying to be forced to resign when
playing in single player mode? I just want to quit the game and start a
new one. Is there some rationale for this, or is quitting when you're
the only one who cares an unimplemented "feature?" I notice that if I
save the game, then quit, I can just quit. Well, how about letting me
just quit?
Psychology. I was originally inspired by nethack, but it enforces it more
strictly by not letting you have multiple save files.
Also, what's the point of asking me who I want to resign to when there's
only 2 players?
I'm pretty sure it used to not ask...
Can resignation be turned off in a scenario? I think it's rather goofy
to be able to surrender to whomever you want, and I don't see why other
players should get an instant capitulation advantage. Why not just turn
a resigned player's cities and units independent?
Think team play. You want to give your stuff to a friend, not make it
easy pickings for the nearest enemy.
Stan