This is the mail archive of the
xconq7@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Xconq project.
Re: Uses for change-type action?
- To: shebs at shebs dot cnchost dot com
- Subject: Re: Uses for change-type action?
- From: Hans Ronne <hronne at pp dot sbbs dot se>
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 22:30:38 +0100
- Cc: xconq7 at sources dot redhat dot com
>So my question is: are there any other uses for change-type?
>I'm especially interested in uses in existing (commercial or
>free) games, since I couldn't find any that actually gave the
>player a choice of different types to change a unit into.
I would opt for keeping the change-type option, since I see it as
potentially very useful. In fact, I was planning to use it myself in
advances.g. You can see that there already are three advanced unit types in
the file: tribes, villages and cities. My idea was that you should be able
to upgrade using change-type once certain criteria were met.
I did consider using the time.g garrisoning trick, but there are problems
with it. For once, the new unit gets a new name and id, which is confusing
both to the player and to the designer who is trying to debug the game.
Also, I am not sure how you would esily transfer facilities, wonders and
other occupants to the upgraded unit. Not to mention accumulated research
and construction points etc.
Of course, some kind of "upgrade" command without options could still do
the trick in many cases. But why take away a more flexible option if it is
already there? One can always make change-type default to one specific unit
only, if one wants a game to be simple.
Hans
Hans Ronne
hronne@pp.sbbs.se