Re: fighters fighting without ammo

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

Hi Chris,

On Sun, 7 Dec 2003, Skeezics Boondoggle wrote:

> Perhaps the calculations for both bomber and fighter attacks could reflect
> a proportional damage assessment based on how many defenders are present?  

If we do something with Bruno's idea of distinguishing between 
point weapons (bullets, etc...) and spread weapons (bombs, 
etc...), then this might be definitely be something to think 
about.

Another idea I have had for a while is "critical hits". Have 
separate 'critical-hit-chance' and 'critical-hit-damage' tables 
which would represent the chance to do extraordinary damage and 
how much damage that would be. This could reflect things like a 
bomb hitting a ship's ammo magazine or an assassin severing 
someone's spinal cord.

> Choose one target with the "a" command and you inflict full damage on that
> one target; click on a full hex otherwise and you potentially inflict
> minor damage on multiple units.  (But the HP granularity probably wouldn't
> allow for that level of precision, and could reduce the effectiveness of
> air attacks too much.  Hmmm.)

Of course, HP and damage could be rescaled to reflect a new  
granularity.

> I'm looking forward to some of the AI improvements, but y'know, most times
> I like to just take a break and "go conquer the world" so it's kind of
> relaxing to just swarm over the map and blast everything to bits.  :-)

Personally, I think that clubbing baby seals gets boring after a 
while.... Maybe if the AI's were more like young walruses that 
tried to gore you occasionally, things would be a bit more 
gratifying....

> I guess if the AIs start to get smarter I'll have to work a little harder.
> :-)

You poor devil. :-)

  Regards,
   Eric