From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29273 invoked by alias); 6 Jun 2004 06:52:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 29266 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2004 06:52:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sccrmhc11.comcast.net) (204.127.202.55) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 6 Jun 2004 06:52:10 -0000 Received: from [67.172.156.222] (c-67-172-156-222.client.comcast.net[67.172.156.222]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with SMTP id <20040606065209011001ag6ue>; Sun, 6 Jun 2004 06:52:09 +0000 Subject: Re: Consumption-per-fire? From: Eric McDonald To: mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca Cc: xconq7@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1086504554.1485.190.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2004 06:52:00 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg00492.txt.bz2 On Sat, 2004-06-05 at 22:35, mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > On Sat, 5 Jun 2004, Eric McDonald wrote: > > This actually raises one of the gripes I have had with capture. A > > captive unit should not always be able to be used by the capturing side. > > If the "unit" basically represents inanimate equipment, then it often > seems natural for the capturing side to be able to use it. If it > represents people, then that seems much less natural - prisoners of war > don't turn into soldiers for the side that captured them, barring a really > good brainwashing technology. Right. That is what I was getting at; I just didn't state it as clearly as you. ;-) > Maybe it would be cool to be able to > overload wrecking even further with the chance to specify a unit type that > the captured unit will turn into - but I think that's another enhancement > that doesn't really need to be made right now. Actually, I had that thought as well, when I was working on Wreckreation, the experimental game module I just checked in. I still ended up doing it, but had to use death as a catalyst to get the desired results. I may yet implement a true 'change-type-on-capture' table; I think it would be fairly easy to do. But, I think I should probably fix a few bugs first, so that I don't feel too guilty about adding features when we are trying to get a release out the door. > On teleportation: one cool way to teleport is to construct a new instance > of yourself at a distance, and then be consumed by the hp-to-garrison > requirement of creating the new unit. I haven't tried that, but I think > it'd work. Neat idea. I had not thought of that. Regards, Eric