Winding Down and Time

[sapper_astro]

Must agree with the Judge. His idea of engineers laying mines is not only historical but also adds an excellent element of tension and challenge. Naturally the AI will need coding on where good places for mines should be and that may be the stickler here.

[Arjuna]

Billy,
 
Re minefields. I would like to have the ability to lay them in the Game too but it's a question of available time and it will most likely take a considerable amount of time to write AI good enough to manage the laying of minefields on the fly. However, you raise a good point about predictability. What if we treated them like reinforcements - ie with different schedules and randomly choose one at the start of each scenario. That way the scenario designer could say have minefields covering the west side of town in schedule 1 and on the east side in schedule 2 and not at all in schedule 3 but say to the north of some other town.
 
This is not perfect but it would help get around the predictability issue.

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna
However, you raise a good point about predictability. What if we treated them like reinforcements - ie with different schedules and randomly choose one at the start of each scenario. That way the scenario designer could say have minefields covering the west side of town in schedule 1 and on the east side in schedule 2 and not at all in schedule 3 but say to the north of some other town.

This is not perfect but it would help get around the predictability issue.

Best idea I heard all week - this would *really* add some spice to the minefield thingie

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

[JudgeDredd]

That would definitely help player to player. At least he only has "an idea" of where they "could" be. I think the number of "schedules" should perhaps differ depending on the scenario size/number of minefields.
 
You would make this for AI v player as well as player vs player? So if the AI was the allies, then it would select one of the random schedules?
 
In that case, that would be good.

[RayWolfe]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna
What if we treated them like reinforcements - ie with different schedules and randomly choose one at the start of each scenario. That way the scenario designer could say have minefields covering the west side of town in schedule 1 and on the east side in schedule 2 and not at all in schedule 3 but say to the north of some other town.

Sometimes you have flashes of brilliance. This is one such time.
Ray

[James Sterrett]

Random selection of minefield patterns makes a lot of sense.  [:)]
 
 

[MarkShot]

From the beta forum on 08/01/06 ... I know that my contribution seem to get lost when you have all the super heavy grogs/mil types discussing a topic. I don't mind and I am used to it anyway.

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

Although mine fields will only be placeable in SM, should they behave like DZ/LZ and with multiple definitions where one is randomly instantiated at scenario start?

[RayWolfe]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

From the beta forum on 08/01/06 ... I know that my contribution seem to get lost when you have all the super heavy grogs/mil types discussing a topic. I don't mind and I am used to it anyway.

Then I apologise to Dave for suggesting he is brilliant! [;)]

Mark, you should surely wear the crown ... trouble is Mark, are so all round excellent that we tend to just be in such awe of you that we don't see the outstandingly good points amongst all your brilliance.
Ray

[Vince_Tooket]

If you keep Assault in the name of the serie, it will continue to speak by itsel. Something like Air-Ground Asssault, Operational assault or better.

[Vince_Tooket]

That have tried to say is that the word "assault" keep a link to the future old name "Ariborne Assault".

[Vince_Tooket]

We could then simplifiate the name of the serie by "assault series"