Re: non-programmer's opinion......

[Eric McDonald <mcdonald@phy.cmich.edu>]

Hi Richard,

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Richard Honeycutt wrote:

> 	I have been following this discussion with interest and 
>have an opinion or 
> two of my own

As have quite a few others over the last few days. I guess for 
list lurkers, there is safety in numbers. :-)

> Just my opinion ( a mostly uniformed one at that )

Uniformed? Are you an airline pilot, police officer, soldier, or 
what? :-)

> Is it possible to build 'chains of command' between units so 
>that a command to 
> an upper level unit would be carried out by units lower in the chain?

There is some capability for this, though I have not verified 
that it works as advertised. See the description of  
'direct-control','unit-control-chance', and 'unit-control-range'  
in the Game Design Manual.

I don't think this really addresses what you were looking for, 
which was delegating the execution of orders. I suppose that if 
standing orders became extended enough, Xconq could have some 
sort of generalized orders system.

> Will facing and its effects ever make it to the game? ( for tactical battles, 
> air combat and some naval combat. ) 

Good question.

> I love this game and want to contribute in any way I can.
> I just am lousy at programming.

But you would be okay with Python?

I also like Xconq quite a bit (if you couldn't tell :-). There are 
plenty of ways to contribute that don't involve programming. One 
could volunteer as an artist, publicist (as Bill Macon did 
recently), or doing some work on the documentation. The master 
manual documentation uses a markup language that is very easy to 
learn, but there is also text documentation and the Xconq Web site 
(outside of the online manuals). If you have artistic talents, I 
know a Xconq game called Bellum Aeternum that could use some 
distinct city and aircraft icons.... Also maybe it is time for a 
new Xconq splash image.

  Thanks for your thoughts and spirit of volunteerism,
    Eric