|
|
 |
My game! |
 |
1
 |
Floofy Canada. Feb 01 2010 09:45. Posts 8708 | | |
Hi guys i programmed a game and i would like suggestion on how to make it more strategic.
this is a turn based game between white and black. white plays first, but starts with 54$ instead of black's 58$+3 (income when starting his turn).
The objective of the game is completly destroying opponement's wall.
There is 5 unit types:
#1 women (2$). This is what determines the number of people you can make each turns. The turn you make her, shes not active yet. For example if you start your turn with 4 womens, you can make 4 units.
#2 Peasant (4$). This is what determines your income. Every time you begin your turn, you get X$, which is the number of peasants you own.
#3 Wall (1$). This does not require womens to build
#4 Archer (5$). Explained below
#5 warrior (2$): These are what is used to attack. there is 2 attack options:
Fight: All your warriors will sacrifice themself against the wall. for each one of your warriors, one ennemy wall is destroyed, but you loose all of your warriors.
Hit and run: Your warriors will initially be killed by ennemy archers, but the survivors will destroy one wall each and run away. for example, if you have 10 warriors and ennemy has 3 archers, you will loose 3 warriors but you will destroy 7 of ennemy's wall.
When the game starts, everyone starts with 3 paysant, 3 women, and 10 wall.
The problem is that the game lacks strategy. its all about making sure its -EV for the ennemy to attack you by having enough wall/archer and making lots of peasants....
SO the game between good players usually last for a long time until someone clearly has way more peasants and eventually win
Note: i programmed a computer for it... it plays ok. if anyone wants to test it you can pm... however its not really that hard to beat whitout handicaps
|
|
| james9994: make note dont play against floofy, ;( | Last edit: 01/02/2010 09:49 |
|
| 0
 |
TheTank United States. Feb 01 2010 09:53. Posts 830 | | |
this is your post of the year? looking at your last 3 posts, you've made one in 2008, 2009, and this one in 2010. You should have just copy/pasted the last post. would have saved u time  |
|
| sigh...its like they are throwing money out of a helicopter and i dont have any hands...so i just break even. | |
|
| 4
 |
iop Sweden. Feb 01 2010 09:59. Posts 4951 | | |
pics of girlfriend please. |
|
| Milkman lol i didnt spend half a thousand on a phone so i could play it cool and be all stealth | |
|
| 0
|
dogmeat Czech Republic. Feb 01 2010 10:12. Posts 6374 | | |
i thought about another game of urs |
| |
|
| 1
 |
SPEWTARD Peru. Feb 01 2010 10:15. Posts 4306 | | | |
| |
|
| 1
|
Spitfiree Bulgaria. Feb 01 2010 10:58. Posts 9634 | | |
| | On February 01 2010 09:12 dogmeat wrote:
i thought about another game of urs |
|
|
| 1
 |
qwerty67890 New Zealand. Feb 01 2010 12:59. Posts 14026 | | |
| | On February 01 2010 09:12 dogmeat wrote:
i thought about another game of urs |
|
|
| 1
 |
genjix China. Feb 01 2010 13:20. Posts 2677 | | |
the problem with your game is the lack of adaptable strategies. you need a set of strategies which can exploit the opponents strategies until they switch.
Rome Total War: archers are good against infantry, cavalry is good against archers and pikemen are good against cavalry.
A game I made: Defensive structures are stronger than offensive units but cannot move. Building houses improves economy. So in this case you either concentrate on economy (at the expense of building defenses or offense), defense (at economy or offenses expense) or offense (blaa bla).
You can throw in conditional clauses and complexities to make it a little more interesting... But often simple strategy games can also be fun if you don't add them. Whether they are better is an argument but I think it's just a matter of style. |
|
| If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. | |
|
| |
|
|
 Poker Streams | |
|
