WarGear Wiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
designer_workshop:proposed:unitrangelimits

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision 		Previous revision
designer_workshop:proposed:unitrangelimits [2014/07/11 07:06]
M57 		designer_workshop:proposed:unitrangelimits [2014/07/11 07:09] (current)
M57 [A Post Comparing M57s Version of the Feature to one proposed by Korrun:]
Line 36: Line 36:
   -An approximation of a territory's MCount can be ascertained by noting the transparency of a superscripted dot that is the same color as the unit # text to which it is attached.   -An approximation of a territory's MCount can be ascertained by noting the transparency of a superscripted dot that is the same color as the unit # text to which it is attached.
  
-A Post Comparing M57s Version of the Feature to one proposed by Korrun:+====A Post Comparing M57s Version of the Feature to one proposed by Korrun:====
 Korrun wrote: Korrun wrote:
  
Line 42: Line 42:
  
 M57 wrote: M57 wrote:
 +
 I think yours is an excellent solution, and though I'm not convinced, I wouldn't be surprised if it is easier to implement.  Let's do a comparison.. I think yours is an excellent solution, and though I'm not convinced, I wouldn't be surprised if it is easier to implement.  Let's do a comparison..
  
 I'm not sure about one being better than the other visually.  Both of our systems don't HAVE to have a visual counter - mine could work just by hovering over the attacking territory - not to mention that with both of our systems the information could be displayed in the attack pop-up window so players could be sure of conditions before they roll the dice. There could be cues like the dots used in Simulgear to warn players when units can no longer move due to terrain restrictions, etc (although that feature would probably be much more relevant with my system). I'm not sure about one being better than the other visually.  Both of our systems don't HAVE to have a visual counter - mine could work just by hovering over the attacking territory - not to mention that with both of our systems the information could be displayed in the attack pop-up window so players could be sure of conditions before they roll the dice. There could be cues like the dots used in Simulgear to warn players when units can no longer move due to terrain restrictions, etc (although that feature would probably be much more relevant with my system).
 +
 Mine involves the target territory while yours involves each individual border. Mine involves the target territory while yours involves each individual border.
 +
 Yours keeps a global count of how many 'attacks' that can be made (this requires a limited # of attacks allowed), while mine keeps individual track of the 'movement' cost of any given piece on the board (attacks are not counted), in effect restricting the range of each stack on an individual basis, all the while not requiring a global limit on the number of attacks that can occur. Yours keeps a global count of how many 'attacks' that can be made (this requires a limited # of attacks allowed), while mine keeps individual track of the 'movement' cost of any given piece on the board (attacks are not counted), in effect restricting the range of each stack on an individual basis, all the while not requiring a global limit on the number of attacks that can occur.
-With yours a player could use all of his movement count to run a single stack quite far, whereas with mine a player can move every stack on the board with no restrictions on the number of stacks that can be moved, but each stack's range would be limited by the set MovementLimit  and terrain restrictions.  Mine simulates time. If you have "Back to Attack ON and enable MovementCount in the Fortify phase, you have a sophisticated mechanism that requires players to consider both 'timing' and 'terrain' when fortifying mid-turn. + 
-Yours uses a per/attack count (right?), while mine uses a per/BorderCrossed count.  Yours better represents time and unit autonomy related elements in the sense that it counts each roll as an 'event.'+With yours a player could use all of his movement count to run a single stack quite far, whereas with mine a player can move every stack on the board with no restrictions on the number of stacks that can be moved, but each stack's range would be limited by the set MovementLimit  and terrain restrictions. 
 + 
 +Mine simulates time. If you have "Back to Attack ON and enable MovementCount in the Fortify phase, you have a sophisticated mechanism that requires players to consider both 'timing' and 'terrain' when fortifying mid-turn. 
 +Yours uses a per/attack count (right?), while mine uses a per/BorderCrossed count. 
 + 
 +Yours better represents time and unit autonomy related elements in the sense that it counts each roll as an 'event.'
 Summarizing: Summarizing:
  
designer_workshop/proposed/unitrangelimits.1405076805.txt.gz · Last modified: 2014/07/11 07:06 by M57

Page Tools

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki