February 26th, 2004, 09:36 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Vacaville, CA, USA
Posts: 13,736
Thanks: 341
Thanked 479 Times in 326 Posts
|
|
Re: national armies?
Quote:
Originally posted by DarkSol:
quote:
Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
Then you are saying that Pangaea should build minotaurs over satyrs, and Atlantis should build those big guys over their little ones?
|
Pangaea should build centaur warriors, mostly.
Probably true.
But Im not sure how the AI (in general terms) considers Centaurs. I would suspect that Centaurs are cavalry and therefore it would be the light cavalry vs heavy cavalry rule.
But if the people who feel the AI should be "fixed" to purchase Heavy Infantry over light infantry (for Ulm is their usual example) then I think it would end up causing Pangaea to purchase Minotaurs instead of Satyrs. The point being that as long as its just 1 AI and 1 rule then it needs to be one that either takes the middle road as far as pros and cons, or be the rule most likely to boost the weaker nations.
[ February 26, 2004, 19:37: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]
__________________
-- DISCLAIMER:
This game is NOT suitable for students, interns, apprentices, or anyone else who is expected to pass tests on a regular basis. Do not think about strategies while operating heavy machinery. Before beginning this game make arrangements for someone to check on you daily. If you find that your game has continued for more than 36 hours straight then you should consult a physician immediately (Do NOT show him the game!)
|