We can have it both ways. I think it can be done through script. -----Original Message----- From: ian-reeds-games-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ian-reeds-games-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of michael Tholl Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 8:29 AM To: ian-reeds-games@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [ian-reeds-games] Re: question for warlords It's perhaps too late to address this in a different fashion in the engine itself, but if we could ensure that friendly splashes worked, and friendly fires were a chance? say 10-20 percent? that might be an option to hang onto the risk of using a skill to harm something powerful, but with a chance that you'd have to hit nearby friendly units, and it would give the computer some help in not destroying it's best units with some splash happy mage. grin Alternatively, if it's really a big enough issue, and it may be in some games, maybe just removing friendly fire altogether would be for the best. I guess the reason I hesitate to say "get rid of it altogether" would be things that have nonotion of friend or foe. A large fireball doesn't care what fule is inits path. A dancing swordsman on the other hand wouldn't slice up a friend standing next to him to hit two or three enemies.. Unless of course he was berserk. Since the code for something like that would likely be incredibly complex though, if it's a big enough issue I'd rather see friendly fire disappear, as long as intentional friendly spashes can remain. if it's both or none, then keep friendly fire. On 3/30/15, Allan Thompson <allan1.thompson@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Good questions. I just don’t know how versatile the friendly fire flag > really is. > The real sticking point is that the computer is simply not smart > enough to judge the pros and cons of friendly fire. Thus it is severely > handicapped. > al > > -----Original Message----- > From: ian-reeds-games-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:ian-reeds-games-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of michael > Tholl > Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2015 11:46 AM > To: ian-reeds-games@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [ian-reeds-games] Re: question for warlords > > i go back and forth on this issue. It's a tough one for me to nail > down 100 percent either way because sometimes it's frustrating to hit > my own units with a skill or spel. > On the other hand, there have been occasions when the enemy takes out > a key unit with the same thing and that's fun to watch. > Aside from knowing never to use a splash damage around my own units > however, the idea of friendly fire is a sort of realistic thing. > In the thick of battle, particularly hand to hand combat, if artillery > or ranged units were still trying to hit the enemy, often times you > would have friendly fire resulting in casualties. Part of the way to > avoid this was through knowing when to halt the ranged attacks, or > when/where to move or set up ranged troops to avoid or minimize this issue. > There are a lot of games for sighted players where you have to worry > about this constantly. > Still, I think turn based games generally don't even have friendly fire. > Having typed all of this, I realized there's another issue here. > If we take out friendly fire, how would this affect splash effects on > healing or other beneficial spells? > Is there a way to remove friendly fire, and keep the splash benefits? > On the same brainwave, if we can do that, can we ensure that enemies > don't benefit from beneficial spells for the other side? > I seem to remember this is already an option on flags, but it's been > ages since I've gone through the manual. > In fact, I thought there were flags to avoid friendly fire too, which > I guess is why I'm asking about all of this now. grin > > > On 3/29/15, Allan Thompson <allan1.thompson@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> I was wondering if people would like to see friendly fire to stop so >> that computer units and structures would be a little more powerful? >> al >> >> "The truth will make you free" >> Jesus Christ of Nazareth 33AD >> >> >> >> >> > > > >
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
