From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23075 invoked by alias); 5 Jun 2004 22:30:23 -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 23065 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2004 22:30:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO web13123.mail.yahoo.com) (216.136.174.141) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 5 Jun 2004 22:30:23 -0000 Message-ID: <20040605223022.2964.qmail@web13123.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [67.170.221.152] by web13123.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 05 Jun 2004 15:30:22 PDT Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 22:30:00 -0000 From: Elijah Meeks Subject: Re: Overrun actions (was: Consumption-per-fire?) To: Hans Ronne Cc: xconq7@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2004/txt/msg00482.txt.bz2 > I think that the second solution might be more > logical, but it would change > the interface behaviour. You would no longer be able > to fire at a unit by > clicking on it in move mode. This is perhaps not > much of a problem since > putting the cursor over the target and hitting "f" > is just as easy (in > fact, I think it is even easier than doing the > clickaton). And you have to > do this anyway if you want to fire from a distance, > since clicking on the > target only works for adjacent units. > > If we remove overrun by fire, units that can also > attack will still be able > to overrun by attack. One example of this is the > godzillas in your game. > They will use melee attacks if the overrun by fire > code is commented out. > Everything then works as expected. The second option sounds like the most sensible. I don't see much sense in overrun by fire, and it doesn't correlate to any strategic games that I've ever played. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/