This is the mail archive of the
xconq7@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the Xconq project.
Re: AI now goes after bases
- From: Peter Garrone <pgarrone at acay dot com dot au>
- To: Hans Ronne <hronne at comhem dot se>
- Cc: xconq7 at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 23:41:26 +1100
- Subject: Re: AI now goes after bases
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312311340460.31528-100000@leon.phy.cmich.edu> <200312310601.hBV61LY11369@panix5.panix.com> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312311340460.31528-100000@leon.phy.cmich.edu> <l03130300bc1bf50bc769@[212.181.162.155]>
On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 06:09:06AM +0100, Hans Ronne wrote:
> >I dont see much benefit from saying cities are more important than
> >mobile units, by a factor of 10. If an opponent were composed entirely
> >of cities, it would be an easy job to defeat them, so it cannot be said
> >that cities are more important than mobile units.
>
> I disagree. In most games cities (or more specifically any units that can
> build other units) are easily 10 times more important than any mobile
> units. Provided, of course that new units are built at a reasonable rate.
Depends on the time frame. If a battle is going to be over before even a
single unit is built, then a city isnt very important. It may be
important as a supply point though, especially with aerial combat.
Peter