PDA

View Full Version : YAFR (yet another feature rant ;-)



rasqual
08-15-2005, 07:06 PM
How about having a time period between deciding to attack, and actually being able to? With the enemy being notified about the pending attack?

This would be more realistic, and it would give the enemy a chance to defend himself (add armies), plead terms with the aggressor, call upon allies for assitance, threaten the aggressor with the prospect of allied attacks on the aggressor's other holdings, and so forth.

The diplomatic/alliance/government widgets have to start being developed, man!

And another thing. Nukes seem to be only good for wiping out armies. They're being used tactically, not strategically. I know, I just nuked a couple guys. Again. ;-)

But nukes should be more strategic, having more deterrent than tactical value. Or perhaps I should say it this way -- you've provided tactical nukes, but no strategic nukes at all.

Furthermore, nuclear proliferation is insane. I think there ought to be some kind of limit on who can even HAVE these things. Needless to say, in a real world it's the most powerful countries. And this is good -- because the most powerful countries are the only ones who can promote geopolitica stabilities not only through armed power, but economic power as well.

Nuclear proliferation has to be tied to economic capability of even creating the things. Just being able to "buy" them in a store is a bit crazy. Among other things, I'd also say that eventually the "store" has to go away. Here, again, we encounter the "space" issue. Where are these things being produced? Space? They're just appearing, out of thin air, on the planet. No, doggonit, arms need to be *traded*. And only developed countries develop sophisticated weapons. And such countries develop because of economic success, because of natural and human resource exploitation.

In some sense, the game has everything backwards. We have colonialist powers bent on emperialism, but there's a vacume at the center of their civilizations. There's no economy driving this. Weapons are beamed down from space!

;-)

There HAS to be wealth production, and wealth production determines economic power, and economic power determines global trading advantages, and these form economic alliances, which serve as a check on aggression, and the wealth allows creation of standing armies for defense, which can be abused for aggression by ignoble leaders, and soldiers need to be paid, fed, and have good morale which can suffer a hit during difficult deployments, and let me pile more on . . .


;-D

Mickey
08-15-2005, 07:39 PM
How about having a time period between deciding to attack, and actually being able to? With the enemy being notified about the pending attack?
This is a big feature I'd like to add, but it'll take some time. I'll need to develop a CRON system of some sort, so it can update things - perform attacks that are due, move troops closer to their goal, etc. It's coming, but it'll take a little while. Changing the army database and creating the home bases are both steps toward this goal.



The diplomatic/alliance/government widgets have to start being developed, man!
I know, I know. They will...



Nuclear proliferation has to be tied to economic capability of even creating the things. Just being able to "buy" them in a store is a bit crazy. Among other things, I'd also say that eventually the "store" has to go away.
Agreed. I've felt from before I even created it that it was a temporary thing. It's an easy way to get armies out there, but it will eventually be replaced by a better system.



Here, again, we encounter the "space" issue. Where are these things being produced? Space? They're just appearing, out of thin air, on the planet. No, doggonit, arms need to be *traded*.
I think they can be "created" to some degree. Look at game like WarCraft and Command & Conquer. You build a barracks and then create armies with $$ from there. With armies getting killed all over the place, more need to be created all the time. I agree that you shouldn't buy them at a store, but then how do you get them?



And only developed countries develop sophisticated weapons. And such countries develop because of economic success, because of natural and human resource exploitation.
That makes sense. Explain how to measure what is a "developed country". Army size? Time in existence? Knowledge upgrades that they pay for? Something else? There is no ambiguity in programming, at least not in the depth of programs I write. :) You need something to measure, and then dole out results accordingly.



There HAS to be wealth production, and wealth production determines economic power, and economic power determines global trading advantages, and these form economic alliances, which serve as a check on aggression, and the wealth allows creation of standing armies for defense, which can be abused for aggression by ignoble leaders, and soldiers need to be paid, fed, and have good morale which can suffer a hit during difficult deployments
Agreed... Ugh.



and let me pile more on . . .
I'm sure you will. :)

rasqual
08-15-2005, 11:43 PM
I think they can be "created" to some degree. Look at game like WarCraft and Command & Conquer. You build a barracks and then create armies with $$ from there. With armies getting killed all over the place, more need to be created all the time. I agree that you shouldn't buy them at a store, but then how do you get them?


That makes sense. Explain how to measure what is a "developed country". Army size? Time in existence? Knowledge upgrades that they pay for? Something else? There is no ambiguity in programming, at least not in the depth of programs I write. :) You need something to measure, and then dole out results accordingly.

http://snipurl.com/gz0t

Again, trust that data you can use as an index will one day be avaible to exploit as layers in Earth, to tie into. Having said that, you face a somewhat different isssue. Client-side accessibility is one thing. Tapping into it aggressively as a game service provider is something else altogether. You need to have deep dialog with Google. I hope you're already there.

Until rich data are available to fund a realistic simulation of our world in the game, though, you'll want to "carefully settle for" proxy indexes, to learn about how to exploit them. Practice makes perfect. Now I don't know whether you can implement the geothermal and solar resource models I've suggested, using the existing layers. If not, you have to dialog with Google. If it's possible to do so fairly simply and unobtrusively from the server-side, then good. You have a starting point.

Just pick one existing layer in Google, and put it to use. To date, I don't hink you're using any. Not one! You're constructing everything, using the rick Earth environment as a graphical interface with a cool surface to look at, and a robust interface for networking services. Not good! Dive into a layer and put it to good use!

Another layer you probably will want to lean on, though not in the resource department, is boundaries. I have no idea how you'd do that. I have no idea how to tap into the layers. But if it's possible to do so, IMO you should do so. Dude. a game that leverages Google's layers, as well as the vast number of privately held dynamic layers that people will be developing? You provide the architectural frame, and the entire community that constructs it all, in all it's granular and global glory, will fill out that framework. You then apply the dev glue to make it work as a collection of elements any world has, model their relationships to correspond as much as possible to how reality works, and voila!

I give you a week.

LOL

Mickey
08-16-2005, 02:49 AM
Just pick one existing layer in Google, and put it to use. To date, I don't hink you're using any. Not one! You're constructing everything, using the rick Earth environment as a graphical interface with a cool surface to look at, and a robust interface for networking services. Not good! Dive into a layer and put it to good use!
I still don't have a clue how to capture layer data dynamically to use in the game. I'm trying to get in contact with some Google folks, so we'll see what happens.


I give you a week.
Thanks for being so generous. :)