[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Glob2-ideas] non-flat terrain

From: Quinn Yee Qin Teh
Subject: Re: [Glob2-ideas] non-flat terrain
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 15:11:50 +1000

Actually there is a difference. Imagine building a tower on high ground, then attackers will have a harder time attacking the tower as they will be moving slower uphill towards the tower, giving the tower more time to kill them.
Also, you can prepare your army on the other side of the hill near your enemy's base, so that they won't be able to see your army until you cross the hill to attack unless they have explorers nearby or towers on top of the hill.
As the purpose of the game is to minimise micromanagement to encourage high-level strategy, I believe things like this will make a substantial difference to the overall gameplay of glob2, compared to other conventional RTS games.

On 7/21/08, DusteD <address@hidden> wrote:
Quinn Yee Qin Teh wrote:
How about having different height values for the terrain so that there are hills (and maybe cliffs)?
-ground units move faster downhill, move slower uphill
-ground units and buildings can't see the other side of the hill
-unpassable for ground units
-ground units and buildings can't see what's on the other side if they're on the low side of the cliff
-dynamically placed on the map if the difference between the height values of 2 adjacent tiles are above a certain threshold

Glob2-ideas mailing list
I think height diffrence is highly overrated, it won't add anything to gameplay.

A illusion of heigt diffrence can easily be achieved anyway, just look at the way red-alert handles it, even though there are no real diffrence in height, the player get a clear impression that there is.

Glob2-ideas mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]