Memory lane, hacked Xconq anno 1988.

Memory lane, hacked Xconq anno 1988.

[Jakob Ilves]

Hello!

Well, I've already touched the subject in another mail, the first version of Xconq I played and a
pretty much hacked up version as well (from now on called Dtek Xconq).  Some features Dtek Xconq
had is present in the current Xconq but some aren't.  I supposed the list could be intrested in a
comparision

Background:

It was in 1988 when I started my studies in computer science at Chalmers University of Technology.
 There was this game, played by some other students and hacked up by a bright guy, Mats Olsson. 
The computer science study programme of course had a name in Swedish, "Datateknik" and hence, the
domain for our computers and mail accounts (our overall internet precense) was and still is
"dtek.chalmers.se".  So, hence my choice for the name "Dtek Xconq".

So the game was based on Xconq 4 and I recall that even in those days, the line "Take over the
world before you are taken over" was the first thing confronting you :-).  Unfortunately, I don't
know if it's available for download anywhere (but I can research).

Ok, I'll do a bunch of comparisions between today's Xconq and Dtek Xconq.  As the scenario in Dtek
Xconq were a fixed one , I'll compare that specific scenario with Xconq's "standard" game.


Overall features:

Architecture:

Dtek Xconq used one single program displaying a window on multiple X-displays so it could only run
on unix and X-windows.  Todays solution is better, having multiple Xconq processes running in a
client server fashion.


Game definition:

Also, Dtek Xconq had no GDL.  The scenario were defined in the source code.  Xconq as of today is
an improvement as well!


Sequence of movement:

In Dtek Xconq, players moved their units in turns, no simultanious movement allowed.  Today's
Xconq is better, providing the option of simultanious movement.


Game grid:

Also, the grid to move on were a square grid on Dtek Xconq.  Xconq as of today use hexes so I find
it again better WITH ONE EXCEPTION: the square grid of Dtek Xconq allowed units to move diagonally
which made life easier when moving units in crowds (no stackin except for in cities/towns/bases)
but also, one could interleave land and sea squares so when two land squares in the water meet in
the corners both land units and sea units could traverse that corner.


Stacking:

Also, as mentioned, no stacking when outside of cities/towns/bases were allowed in Dtek Xconq. 
Yes, you could accidently lock in your own troops.  There we have nice progess done in today's
Xconq.


Combat Experience:

In Dtek Xconq, units recieved experience by being involved in combat, both as attackers as well as
defenders.  When getting enough experience, they moved up in experience levels and as they did so,
they became better in combat (both as defenders as well as attackers/capturers).  The levels were
from lowest to highest: "green", "trained", "experienced", "veteran", "elite" and "ramboid" (the
latter "honoring" the guy Rambo in First Blood II :-).  This gave the game a nice touch.  If you
had a damaged unit, that unit usually had attained some experience level increase and thus, it was
valuable to try to "get it home" before it was slain by enemies seeking vengeance.  Also, Dtek
Xconq allowed the units to stand "training", that is, do nothing but recieve a small amount of XP
every turn.

I really miss this experience thing in today's Xconq.  What you have today is an experience points
system which improves the unit as an attacker but which don't have any effect on the unit's
ability to defend itself which pretty much defeats the whole concept.  Maybe this experience
levels kind of thing can be implemented in today's Xconq?


Terrain features:

Dtek Xconq had the usual set of terrains: Deep sea, shallows, forests, desert, plains, mountains
and ice.  There were no such thing such as border terrain (rivers) or connector terrain (roads). 
Also there were no such thing as terrain feature identifying or naming ("Muffys Desert")  So,
today's Xconq again has done nice progress.


City/town/base defense:

In Dtek Xcond it worked like this: When a unit attacked a town (or a thing with passengers) the
passengers defended the transport if appropriate.  Some units could not defend against certain
attackers but in general it made sense: infantry, armor and mechinf units defended against ground
units, fighters and anti aircraft against airunits.  Sea units defended against sea units.

The attacker were confronted with one defender and if that defender was killed, the next defender
was subject to an attack and if that were killed then next defender were in line.  If there were
no defenders left when a ground unit attacked a city/town/base or the last defender were killed an
attempt were made to capture the city.  Usually captures succeeded, because it was usually hard
enough to ensure all defenders were killed.

Of course, an highly experienced armor or even worse an highly experienced commando could wipe out
a large number of unexperienced defenders in one single attack, possible capturing the city.

When capturing cities, as today, the planes and vessels inside could be captured unless they
successfully self destructed.

Similarly, when a fighter or bomber attacked a city, any fighters in it went up and confronted the
attacker as described above.  So, if you want to bomb a town with bombers, ensure you first kill
the fighters and anti aircraft by using distant artillery attacks agains the town firsts.  And as
your bombers soften the town, you can then go in with your ground units.

Xconq of today, as Brandon pointed out, requires that you DON'T stuff your cities with ground
units or else you loose them all when a single enemy captures your town.  Kind of silly IMHO and
I'm still thinking that should be fixed in standard.g (and bellum aetaernum if that thing is
there).  Don't GDL as of today support the above described "you have to kill all defending ground
units or else you cannot capture" model?


Visual differences:

First, Dtek Xconq were played on monocrome black and white screens.  No colors, no shades. :-). 
There was one color screen in our computer room and it was a lie to get access to that one as a
non-serious, gaming student.

Never mind, there were a few diffs in how Dtek Xconq and today's Xconq standard.g displayed units.

First of all, Dtek Xconq used the military symbols for infantry, commandos, armor, mech inf etc. 
Being an sentimental *hole I must admit I much prefer those over the silhouettes provided by
today's standard.g game.

Another notable difference is that in Dtek Xconq your own units were in normal video (black
graphics on white background) but the enemy where in reverse video (showing up as black symbols). 
That made for a very striking visual when something alien showed up and I wonder, could we
implement something similar as an option in Xconq today?  That is, as a complement or alternative
to the symbol up to the right the entire unit's graphics change color or become revers video or
something.  Actually, many strategy games uses that scheme that a part of the graphic is set to
the team color and maybe that's something for us?

Also worth noting, Dtek Xconq did not use flags.  Only a tiny number in the upper right.  Because
of this, the max no of players were 9.

Scenario differences:

Of course, I have to point out things I miss from the Dtek Xconq, units and tactics that became
nearo and dear.

First: all units moved twice as fast as in today's standard.g game.  Infantry moved two steps,
armor four. A fighter moved 22 steps, using up all it's fuel. That speeded up the game somewhat.

Ranged combat: Battleships could shell 3 squares away.  Cruisers and artillery 2 away.  Missile
units had range of 15 but were one use only.  Ranged combat were often used to soften up cities or
land units.

Commando:  These moved a bit slower than infantry, 1.5 steps (which were implemented as 2 steps
one turn 1 step next turn).  They were the "submarines" of land as they sneaked around without
being seen by enemies next to them.  They were deadly attackers in the forest as well as deadly
against cities/town/bases.  They were not that good on the defense, thought.  They had one unit of
fuel, used up when they traversed one square of water.  They were the only ground unit that could
be transported on a submarine or a bomber.  You could train them or send them immediatedly as
"green" units to distant missions, where they crept up and wreaked havoc on enemy bases, unless an
enemy unit happened to stumble upon them.  Still remember the shouts from the nearby players
("What do I see?  A little commando...  Haha!") while cursing myself.  Or the joy when it survives
in it's sub or bomber, is deployed close to the enemy city, sneaks by and CAPTURES IT!!!

As you already has figured out, I really miss these little James Bonds.  Damn, they became
strategic assets in the game when the reached "veteran" or higher levels of experince.

There was no nuke unit in Dtek Xconq IIRC.  I never missed it :-).

Another unit present in Dtek Xconq was the missile battery.  Crept on step a turn, used up when it
fired but it reached 15 squares.  Usually you loaded them on an armor, infantry but you could also
fill up a troop transport with them and go off to flatten that pesky enemy town.

Anti aircraft units were present in Dtek Xconq as well.  Defended it's transport (be it armor,
cruiser or town) against air attacks and it were pretty good at it.  Also crept 1 step/turn.

Artillery: shelled up to 2 squares away, could be loaded upon infantry or armor.  Think the thing
actually moved 2 step/turn.

Unfortunately, the game was not perfectly balanced so the guy who just built fighters, armor and
troop transports and a few other boats for escort won the game.  Anti aircraft and missiles were
usually too costly and artillery was slightly so as well.  Commandos came in use from time to time
but they were rather costly as well.


AI players:

All AI players teamed up against the human players which in a sense is intresting.  They are
spread all over the place instead of as in today's Xconq the enemy is one huge settlement being N
times bigger than yours.

Well, probably there were other features in this mix as well, but I cannot recall them all :-).

Hope you find it intresting.  The four things I miss the most is the commandos, the ability to
stuff up a town with ground units and defend it with them until they are gone, the black reverse
video appearance of the enemy troops and most of all: the combat experience scheme!

Best regards

/IllvilJa

(the dustcollecting oldtimer)



=====
(Jakob Ilves) <illvilja@yahoo.com>
{http://www.geocities.com/illvilja}

Höstrusk och grå moln - köp en resa till solen på Yahoo! Resor på adressen http://se.docs.yahoo.com/travel/index.html